text:
Talk:La Paz

Adventure brew hostel
These kids (using the signature TABH) insist on praising themselves at lengh. Keep an eye open. (WT-en) Mariusm98 20:53, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Guide?!
This article seems pretty complete. Shall we change the status to guide?

Looks pretty good to me, but it wouldn't hurt to have one more for eat / sleep / drinks (WT-en) Majnoona 10:19, 16 Feb 2006 (EST)

OMG THANK YOU THANK YOU SO MUCH I LOVE YOU GUYS so when is the site going to be up for eat/ sleep/ drinks? I am so excited!

AMS
There should be a section discussing altitude sickness. It is a potential problem for tourists to La Paz and should be included in this article.

I disagree. Such a section should be placed in the article describing the country. You could include a link in the Stay Healthy section of the city. (WT-en) Mariusm98 20:53, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Bone smooching wars
So, a silly slow-motion edit war is in progress over whether sentence "Gringo males will have no problems getting their bone smooched at this little gem of a place" should be used to describe a club. I, personally, think this line adds little if anything of value, and I've never heard the expression "getting your bone smooched" anywhere else, but neither do I think it's particularly offensive or against our policies. Other opinions? (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:24, 18 June 2007 (EDT)
 * I can't say I've heard it anywhere else either, but the meaning is pretty obvious. You don't think recommending a place by saying it is easy to get a blow job there is against our policies? I find it pretty crass. (WT-en) Texugo 19:13, 18 June 2007 (EDT)
 * I concur with Texugo on this one. Cripes, we'll have bone smooching all over WT. Next thing you know there will be swallow specials and depth-of-throat wars. Let the traveller find his own pimps. (WT-en) OldPine 16:00, 6 October 2007 (EDT)

Vanessa
This listing doesn't look very useful to me. It seems to violate our tour policy, as the substance of the tour can be fulfilled by the traveler. Claiming to take tourists to places they wouldn't be able to find on their own doesn't count, because this article could simply list those places. That's not what the tour policy is intended to cover; it means that the tour must take people places that they would not be allowed to go under non-tour circumstances. I mean, come on, it uses public transportation; it's not even a chartered vehicle! (WT-en) LtPowers 14:18, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

BTW I AM NOT VANESSA. I am an experienced traveler in South America. So, how does a traveler manage to report something very exciting that she would like to turn other people on to? I did the best I can with the names of the places, a description, and to report how I got there using different buses and trufis with their numbers and names, how long it took and what I saw. Such as: ...overlooks the Achocalla Valley, so we jumped on a minibus No 377 and went to the end of the line at Mercado Llojeta, had a cup of coffee and jumped on a trufi run by the Sindicato Avaroa to Alpacoma.

Without Vanessa I never would have even heard of these places, much less in my limited time figured out how to get to them. A person really has to cite the author of any trip they design just as they would a research paper, magazine article or whatever. So do I just rip off her research finding these places and her lifelong experience? Or do I just say something like WOW that was a great tour or trip and leave it at that? I am really mystified if a user cant write a review. What if I go on a tour and it was a rip off or a hostal and it sucks?

And what is wiki/extras? Where, as a wikivoyage user, does someone post their experiences.

—The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Mitziblossem (talk • contribs)

 * There's a convenient link to Wikivoyage Extra in the left-hand sidebar, underneath "Uploads & bug reports". It's at http://extra.wikivoyage.org/ - That's the place for anecdotes, reviews, and stories.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:54, 21 June 2010 (EDT)

Cool! I talked to some friends and they said that some of what I put up sounded like spam, and that sites such as wiki have trouble with advertising posts. So, sorry, now I get it. I talked to Vanessa and she says go ahead and put the areas we visited up without her name. Is that acceptable? Oh, per your comment about using public transport. The La Paz system is quite complex and travelors can save huge amounts of money if they learn the basics of using minibus and microbuses. Thats one of the things I learned.

 * Don't just post up an itinerary of places you went, whether Vanessa's name is attached or not. But of course you can incorporate information you've learned into the article; that's exactly what we want.  Take a look at some of our Star articles for examples of how best to do write for our travel guides!  (WT-en) LtPowers 16:42, 22 June 2010 (EDT)

removed listing
I removed this listing because someone marked it as closed:
 * Ram Jam (Closed) Presbitero Medina 2124, near Plaza Avaroa, is another popular place, Less gringos than Mongos. Serves Saya beer from Adventurebrew hostel. Occasional live gigs. 0,6 l beer 18 Bs. Saturday cover charge 10 Bs.

-- (WT-en) LtPowers 10:19, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

Listing removed - don't know why
I added a listing for a Spanish teacher to the La Paz article last night, and it was reverted without comment a little later. Can someone explain why? What did I do wrong? Is it because I didn't have an account?

I'll undo the revert in a short while if it isn't explained, as I can currently see no reason for it.

 * Perhaps my editing summary explained this for you. We don't list individuals on Wikivoyage. I've never seen an exception that stood that I can think of. Please make an argument for why this should be an exception and wait for others to comment before restoring your listing again. Thanks a lot. Also, on "Talk" pages, please sign your posts by typing 4 tildes in a row. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:11, 25 January 2012 (EST)

 * Thanks for the explanation. However, Wikivoyage does list individuals, whether this is policy or not, as demonstrated in the section under discussion: Iris Calacoto is clearly an individual offering private tuition. See also the Learn section in Sucre, where two private tutors are listed - down from three, since I removed Rita Clavijo from the list when I added her to the La Paz Learn section (she has moved from Sucre to La Paz in order to support her daughter's studies there).

 * Please not that I do not intend to suggest the deletion of the above mentioned listings; they are valuable resources for travellers, removing them would reduce the usefulness of Wikivoyage, and they are all long-standing listings whose removal at this point would smack of arbitrary self-justification.

 * As it happens, I think there is a strong argument for listing individual language tutors. Of those travellers who wish to improve their understanding of the language(s) of the country in which they're travelling, many find formal school environments impossible to learn in (or cannot conveniently fit in with such schools timetables), and require private tuition in order to progress; a ban on listing individual tutors makes these students lives more difficult for no discernible benefit.

 * Also, in Bolivia at least, the Spanish schools are notorious for ripping off both their students and their teachers, charging ridiculous amounts for homestays and lying about the amount passed on to the families concerned, falsely claiming to donate a proportion of their profit to local charities, etc. etc., and many travellers prefer to arrange private tuition for this reason alone.

 * Further, in my experience the best language teachers universally choose to work outside the schools. No teacher with talent puts up with their atrocious pay and inflexibility of curriculum for very long, so they are usually staffed by inexperienced University students who are doing the work as a sideline, and have no real interest in teaching.

 * Finally, a ban on individuals is trivial to circumvent. No doubt now that I've raised the issue, some eagle-eyed editor would spot it in this particular case, but if Rita had decided to promote herself as the "Instituto Clavijo" or somesuch, I doubt the editors of Wikivoyage would have the resources to discover her cunning subterfuge. (WT-en) Schesis 03:49, 25 January 2012 (EST)

 * Update: I've just spent some time looking around the help, policy etc. pages, and can find no reference to a ban on listings of individuals anwhere. As can probably be gathered from what I wrote above, I think that such a ban, if it exists, is counterproductive, but since I can't find any evidence of its existence, that makes it rather difficult to challenge. Can someone point me at the relevant page(s), if any exist? (WT-en) Schesis 05:21, 25 January 2012 (EST)
 * Schesis, Wikivoyage will always be work in progress. We are by far not enough editors and admins to control all articles. Our general policy is to assume good faith in anyone here and you are free to change/delete listings here that you find in contradiction to our policies. See Plunge forward and tour policy as basis for moving forward and that tour guides need to offer something special to be listed here. I would support Ilkan's position as we have a huge amount of spam of language teachers, we assume good faith in general but circumvention is a reality we don't like but can't cope with. If Rita (the discussed language teacher) has something to offer that is different to other operator imho most editors/admins would be more likely to allow that listing. Regards, (WT-en) Jc8136 07:50, 25 January 2012 (EST)

 * Phew. I just read through the last hundred edits to this page, so that I could see what you meant by "a huge amount of spam of language teachers" ... more radio buttons than I've clicked in a long while :-/

 * What I found relating to language learning were a number of minor edits correcting what appeared to be honest mistakes (mainly relating to Iris Calacoto, who despite being an individual, I notice was not removed at any point), and one extended and frankly egregious example of misbehaviour from ABC Spanish Tuition School through the first half of 2011, including repeated reinsertions of touting language, and in a couple of instances the malicious removal of a competing school's listing. Again, I notice that despite this flagrant abuse of documented Wikivoyage policy, their listing is still up.

 * I have also attempted an exhaustive search through Wikivoyage's policy and help pages, and can still find no reference to any policy barring individual listings. While I really don't want to get into an edit war over this, I do think it's incumbent on anyone asserting a policy violation as justification for a removal to provide some evidence of said policy, especially when the facts on the ground strongly suggest that no such policy is generally applied in practice.

 * Jc8136, you suggested I consider Plunge forward and tour, and that "tour guides need to offer something special". I'm not sure if this is exactly what you meant, but neither page actually says that, or, to my mind, anything equivalent. tour does say (to paraphrase slightly) that tours should offer something that Wikivoyage can't, and that a traveller couldn't accomplish by themselves - which I don't think applies to language teachers, unless all learners are assumed to be autodidacts or Wikivoyage has a comprehensive "teach yourself Spanish" section that I've somehow missed.

 * Furthermore, I don't think any of the existing listings in the Learn section meet a "special" criteria - once the promotional language is removed, none of them (except Sra. Calacoto, perhaps) offers anything beyond what every other language school offers. However, perhaps Rita can meet the "special" criteria to the satisfaction of WT editors - let's see. For reference, here's the listing I added in the first place, verbatim:

 * Private tuition from a friendly teacher with more than ten years experience teaching Spanish.

 * In fact, while I hadn't read any of Wikivoyage's policy pages at the time I added the listing, I was consciously attempting to avoid what I now know is termed "touting" language here, and with that in mind made a point of keeping the listing as concise and un-"promotional" as possible ... but perhaps I can improve it somewhat in light of the "special" criteria. How does this look?

 * For those who find learning in a formal school environment difficult, or whose schedules make fitting in with a school's timetable impossible, Rita offers private tuition at whatever time is most convenient, either at her home, your hostel, or a quiet café of your choice. With more than ten years experience teaching Spanish, and a positive, adaptable approach based on her extensive study of cognitive theory, Rita specialises in helping students who have found that rigid, traditional approaches don't work for them.

 * Describing what makes Rita special as a teacher (and she is) while steering clear of language that might be considered touting is difficult, but I have done my best here. I'd welcome suggestions for improving the listing further, but as it stands, I think it's already considerably better written and more conformant to Wikivoyage policy than any of the current listings on the page. I may, of course, be biased :-)

 * As it happens, I am in the process of helping Rita to build a website advertising her services, and as a result I have a file containing about thirty very glowing testimonials from former students - but I assume that including anything of that kind would be considered touting. I can, however, post some of them here if anyone is interested, and with a little effort, may be able to get agreement from some of the people who offered them to confirm their veracity.

 * I have to admit that what started as a straightforward attempt to help a friend by moving her (never contested) listing from Sucre to La Paz because of her move has now taken far longer than I anticipated. I also believe it unlikely that any of the currently listed schools have worked as hard to jump through what are starting to feel like arbitrary hoops.

 * So, is this enough? Does she get in, or do the listings remain restricted to crooks like ABC?

 * (okay, that was grouchy - my apologies. But it is proving surprisingly difficult to contribute to Wikivoyage, and my normally pleasant demeanour may have suffered as a result).

 * (WT-en) Schesis 23:14, 25 January 2012 (EST)

 * Hi, Schesis. I'm sorry this process has become disagreeable to you. This site is maintained by volunteer editors, and we function on consensus. I am very torn about this, not because I have any doubts about this particular case (you've pretty much convinced me that she is a legitimate instructor), but because if we start to allow individuals to list, we might be overwhelmed with such listings. Any other individual whose listing was allowed to stand probably had a listing no-one ever got around to deleting. I will say this: A website will probably help make the listing seem more legitimate to other editors who have a look. But I am generally concerned that listings for businesses of all types are unreliable and are not and really cannot be subjected to any kind of consistent quality checks on this site. I feel like, while it is possible to attack touting, it is probably a losing battle to try to make sure whatever is listed is really an honest, quality business. But those larger musings aside, I'd like to see what other people have to say before giving a firm opinion on the implications of allowing a listing for an individual. But do keep working with us, and please don't feel discouraged. If I did anything that suggested to you that I don't value your contributions and efforts, please let me assure you, it was nothing personal and was based only on what has been considered best for the site, to date, in my experience.

 * All the best, (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:45, 26 January 2012 (EST)

 * Thanks, IK. So just when do we decide the indentation level in here has gotten out of hand? Anyway, cracking straight on ...

 * re: "if we start to allow individuals to list, we might be overwhelmed with such listings" - well, we don't have to wonder; we can look at the evidence.

 * But first: now that I've gone back and checked, I see I made a mistake. The other individual listing I've mentioned seems to have been badly edited since being added, and the teacher in question is actually called Iris Palacios (see http://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=La_Paz&diff=1610611&oldid=1605344 and google "Iris Palacios La Paz" for confirmation).

 * Anyway ... Sra. Palacios listing was added over a year ago, and has not resulted in a flood of similar listings; my review of the last hundred edits showed (or so I thought - see below) that there were no other attempts to add listings for individual teachers between Sra. Palacios on 14 January 2011 and my attempt to add Rita on 23 January 2012. So: one attempt per year ... hardly overwhelming.

 * However: as you might imagine, I've been talking to Rita about what's happening with her listing ... and she noticed something I didn't. "ABC Spanish Tuition School" - who you may recall from earlier in this conversation was guilty of repeated, flagrant policy violations, but whose listing remains - lists its address as Avenida Simon Bolivar 1880, which happens to be about five minutes walk from Rita's house. This confused her, as she thought she knew all of the Spanish Schools in her neighbourhood, so she went to take a look, and ... it's a private house.

 * A little digging around reveals that "ABC Spanish Tuition School" is a trading name of William Ortiz - an individual teacher (albeit one who pretends to be a school). She even got hold of one of his flyers, which maintains the pretence - I can post a scan if you like.

 * Now, Sr. Ortiz may very well be an excellent teacher for all I know, but that brings the count of private individuals listed on the page to two out of five. After agonizing over this somewhat, I've edited the section in the light of this information (and fixed Sra. Palacios' listing at the same time). Hopefully it is clear that I've only done this in the interests of accuracy. Personally, if I'd been an editor at the time of Sr. Ortiz' misbehaviour last year, I'd have banned him permanently, but I wasn't, and in any case, as a friend of one of his competitors it would feel wrong to do so.

 * I think the example of Sr. Ortiz and his "school" serves to illustrate the wrongheadedness of any ban on individual listings - as I previously argued, such a ban is trivial to circumvent, and in fact encourages deceptive behaviour on the part of individual teachers. During my conversations with Rita, she has suggested that maybe Wikivoyage will be happier if she lists herself as something like "Instituto Clavijo", and while I know she intended no attempt to deceive by this suggestion, I've persuaded her that such an action would not be well received. However, as you can see, it is a solution to the problem that others have acted on.

 * At this point I'd like to summarize my argument, because this conversation is becoming quite long, and perhaps offputting to an editor or admin who stumbles across it. So ...

 * It is asserted that Wikivoyage has a policy against listing individual language teachers, as justification for the removal of a listing by Rita Clavijo.

 * I disagree with that justification, for the following reasons:

 * The policy is not documented; or at least, repeated requests to provide documentation for it have not been met, and a thorough search of Wikivoyage's published policy and help pages has proved fruitless. An informal, unwritten agreement between a subset of editors and admins (if that is what we're actually talking about) should not be considered to constitute policy, and such an undisclosed agreement goes against the spirit of Wikivoyage and wikis in general.

 * The policy is wrong: Many learners find private tuition more productive than a formal school environment, and a significant number are unable to learn satisfactorily at all in a school.

 * The policy is trivial to circumvent, and indeed encourages deceptive and inaccurate listings, as demonstrated by the case of William "ABC" Ortiz.

 * The only justification so far given for the policy (that allowing individual listings would result in a flood of spam) is not supported by evidence, as demonstrated by the lack of listing attempts in more than a year since self-described private tutor Iris Palacios was listed.

 * The policy is not enforced in practice, or at least, not consistently. This is not merely oversight; the listing for Iris Palacios is obviously for a private tutor, and has been edited several times since its inclusion, but never removed.

 * ... I think that's about it. Thanks, IK, for continuing this dialogue. On the subject of websites ... yes. There will be something better than the current holding page at http://ritaclavijo.com - but it is taking a while, as I have my plate full with work at the moment, and I want it to look a little better than ... well, this: http://abc-spanishtuition.tk

 * (WT-en) Schesis 13:50, 27 January 2012 (EST)

 * The thing is, any policy has to take into account all other guides, not just the La Paz guide. I'm not arguing this point with you now and appreciate the work you've put into this, but I think we need more response from others to achieve a consensus. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 15:41, 27 January 2012 (EST)

 * One issue that will have to be considered before making a decision on listings of individuals is the number of individuals who seek to list themselves as tour guides and drivers all over the place. A decision would have to be made about which categories individuals can be listed in. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 06:17, 28 January 2012 (EST)

(indent)... I have been watching this discussion recently and have not contributed earlier as the situation is fraught with contradictions. It is difficult to provide an opinion on this that is in any significant way in variance with Ikan Kekek's explanation. He has already very clearly and succinctly described the problem at hand in listing an individual service provider. I believe he is quite correct in what has been stated and I agree with all points that he has made. Also I might add that Ikan is an admin here so you have not been getting advice from someone on a whim. I am very familiar with his editing style. Our activities often overlap on many articles here so I see his common sense approach and decision making style on this site, normally on a daily basis.

As already outlined by Ikan, the issue of supporting the listing of individuals opens all sorts of problems up as a staggering number of taxi and car drivers, tour guides and assorted other individuals seek to list in these articles. Some are incredibly persistent and are really only interested in self promotion. However some of them may have degrees from a university qualifying them as experts in archeology, architecture or anthropology or have a depth of local knowledge and awareness (regardless of formal qualification) that is otherwise unavailable, whilst others are possibly just opportunistic touts and souvenir sellers. It seems without question that this language teacher Rita Clavijo is a legitimate and professional service provider. I certainly agree that the prevailing policy can be, and not doubt is circumvented by others who may be only providing a veneer of operating a language school. Possibly it would be more correct in this instance to remove the listings of all providers who are not operating as a legitimate language school, however that is also fraught with difficulty. If Rita Clavijo is a licenced teacher and is permitted to legally operate a language tuition service in La Paz providing tuition services by one or more teachers then perhaps we should allow her to list her service here. I note she is also offering some fixed location services such as internet access by WiFi and some sort of accommodation service. If Rita Clavijo is operating from a fixed address rather than doing call outs and is providing some student facilities, student resources, volunteer placements, is packaging associated homestay arrangements and other associated services of benefit to a traveller seeking foreign language tuition at that address, and is licenced to do so at that address, then perhaps she should be listed here. Any persons who are not holding appropriate qualifications (and licences if they are required in La Paz) should not be listed here as they may be thinly disguised accommodation booking services or tour guide operators. (WT-en) Schesis please do understand that this is a difficult and potentially contentious decision to make. I also add that I am only giving an opinion here and attempting to further underline what Ikan has already outlined. If Ikan decides to make a positive recommendation to proceed with listing Rita Clavijo's language service I will support him (in the context of consensus) in doing that. I hope this slightly convoluted explanation assists the matter a little. -- (WT-en) felix 12:35, 28 January 2012 (EST)

 * Thanks, felix ... I've left this discussion alone for a little while in line with Ikan's suggestion that more response from others is needed to acheive a consensus, but although I'm not familiar with the pace of discussion here, there doesn't seem to be anyone else interested in chipping in ... so ...

 * The big concern seems to be that once individuals are allowed ... and I won't keep banging on too much about how they already are ;-) ... there'll be a flood of not only language teachers but tour guides, taxi drivers, etc. etc. I can see the point there, but realistically, a blanket policy just isn't going to work in the latter case.

 * You can't throw a rock without hitting a taxi in La Paz, and it would be pointless to list them there ... but I speak from the heart when I say that if I'd known the phone number of a taxi driver one time I was in Yotala and missed the last bus back to Sucre, for example, I would have been a much happier bunny. An unexpected several-hour walk at night along an unlit road that you don't know is not always fun, and for a lone (especially female) traveller, could be very dangerous. I'm sure people can think up other examples for themselves; the point is that tourist locations are extremely diverse, and no blanket policy of that sort on any subject is ever going to make sense in every case.

 * On the subject of 'licensed language teachers': there's no such thing in Bolivia, unless you're going to count the National Insurance certificates anyone doing any kind of business at all in this country is supposed to hang on their wall.

 * 'Qualified' is, of course, another matter, but you can be sure that the teachers employed by the schools don't meet that criterion. As I've already mentioned, they're typically students (usually not even language students) moonlighting from their classes; no-one else would put up with the working conditions. The upshot is that restricting listings to schools practically guarantees that users of Wikivoyage will only be able to find the least competent, least experienced teachers.

 * Anyway ... without wanting to get too monotonous on this subject, I do think it's an important point that the "no private individuals" policy we're talking about does not appear to actually exist. It's not documented, and I've found no examples at all of it being applied except in this particular case ... which can lead one to feel somewhat singled out, especially when other instances that are flagged up, sometimes demonstrating deliberate deception, are studiously ignored.

 * I think, in the circumstances, it's reasonable to assume that no-one else is likely to contribute to this thread, and I also think it's reasonable that if William Ortiz, Iris Palacios, and the two private teachers that remain in the Sucre article (now that I've deleted Rita from there) are allowed to keep their listings, Rita should be able to keep hers.

 * (WT-en) Schesis 00:36, 8 February 2012 (EST)

 * Okay, then ... no further discussion in the three weeks since I last raised my head over the parapet.

 * On that basis, and since I notice that the listing for private teacher William Ortiz has been the subject of another minor edit scuffle and at no point during that episode has anyone here made any attempt to remove his listing, I'm going to assume it's okay to put Rita's listing back too.

 * As a side note, since it's been a part of the discussion, Rita does now have a website: http://ritaclavijo.com ...

 * (WT-en) Schesis 00:14, 29 February 2012 (EST)

 * Hi, guys. Sorry to have been away. There was some discussion here: http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub#Listings_of_individuals

 * Have a look there, but I have no problem with your putting a listing back up. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:58, 3 March 2012 (EST)

title: Talk:La Paz


text:
Talk:La Paz (city, Honduras)

How do we want to deal with the La Pazes (Les Pazes? Pazi?) The one in Honduras is more well known than the one in Baja AFAIK, do others agree? (WT-en) Majnoona 13:16, 18 Jan 2006 (EST)

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

title: Talk:La Paz (city, Honduras)


text:
Talk:La Paz (department, Bolivia)

Unless there is another "La Paz Department" somewhere else in the world, the double-disambig is unnecessary. (WT-en) Jpatokal 20:51, 12 March 2006 (EST)

 * Apparently there are two - one in El Salvador, and one in Honduras.

title: Talk:La Paz (department, Bolivia)


text:
Talk:La Paz (disambiguation)

The "most famous" question
I'd consider the capital of Bolivia to qualify easily for the "so much more famous" clause in the disambiguation policy, but another user (also working on Mexico's La Paz) changed the redirect to the disambiguation page instead. Any other opinions? I'm inclined to change it back, but won't hurt to ask around first.... - (WT-en) D. Guillaime 23:41, 18 January 2010 (EST)
 * Although I agree with your reasoning, the volume of visitors to each destination, makes me think a disamb might be the way to go. --(WT-en) inas 00:13, 19 January 2010 (EST)

 * I hadn't even heard of the Mexican one. We had a discussion going recently suggesting that a pretty clear objective rule of thumb would be to give national capitals and major metropolises preference. La Paz is both of those. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:25, 19 January 2010 (EST)

Move La Paz (Bolivia) to La Paz
The stunning capital of Bolivia seems like a straightforward candidate to be moved to La Paz. I think it pretty easily passes the "much more famous" rule, and besides, we are just using a redirect for that page anyway. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:38, 21 September 2011 (EDT)
 * I agree. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 02:29, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
 * Absolutely much more famous than all the others. (WT-en) Justme 04:41, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
 * Fully agreed. I keep coming across cases like this one, and must get around to proposing similar changes.--(WT-en) burmesedays 08:05, 22 September 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:La Paz (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:La Paz (Mexico)

get info of the internet or the offical site
 * Hem, yuh, yes. Thank you for that suggestion. Please see Project:Goals and non-goals.

La Paz
As mentioned on the Honduras La Paz talk page, do folks think this La Paz is really equally well known as that one? Do we disambig? (WT-en) Majnoona 13:20, 18 Jan 2006 (EST)

there was a pretty big roach in our room at hostel california, but it was still a cool place the seven crown on the waterfront is a REALLY nice hotel

Taxi rates from the airport
The text is contradictory. Are they set or not? This has to be resolved, as the article makes no sense now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:La Paz (Mexico)


text: Talk:La Plata

title: Talk:La Plata


text:
Talk:Laramie

Disambiguator
Is the disambiguator needed? I'm not aware of any other places named Laramie. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 21:19, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

 * I can't think of any others, and Wikipedia isn't showing anything of note, so my votes goes for dropping the disambiguator. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:47, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Laramie


text:
Talk:Laredo

Nice job, Dad! --(WT-en) Evan 20:09, 20 Mar 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Laredo


text:
Talk:Largs

Needs Isin --(WT-en) CoonCat89 14:51, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Largs


text:
Talk:Larisa (prefecture)

This is a page about the Nomos of Larisa (or Larissa).

title: Talk:Larisa (prefecture)


text:
Talk:Las Cruces

Thanks for getting started on this; it's been on my to-do list for some time. I'll try to help populate it. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:41, 21 Dec 2005 (EST)

Spaceport
Improbably enough, there really will be a spaceport near (albeit not "in") Las Cruces. Here's a link to info. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 09:42, 21 February 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Las Cruces


text:
Talk:Las Palmas

could we get a bit more about this, perhaps some transportation in and out of the island, including options other than airfare? Thanks! --66.18.161.91 00:36, 13 December 2007 (EST)

 * I've done up the Get in, Get around, and See sections. A lot of it was translated or adapted from es:. (WT-en) Texugo 02:08, 13 December 2007 (EST)

Removed Train Diatribe
I removed a rant about a upcoming train line and how it will ruin the economy; not pertinent to the article.

title: Talk:Las Palmas


text:
Talk:Las Piedras

Archived VfD
Delete this page was started by an ananymous user in spanish. Then all content was remowed. (WT-en) ViMy 17:20, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * Keep; it is a real place, or rather several according to Wikipedia . Probably needs to be a disambig page here too. (WT-en) Pashley 20:00, 28 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yes I know. There is one in Puerto Rico, and two in South America. But the question are, will we get articles for this places? I searched spanish Wikivoyage, and found no articles. But of course a Disambig-page is at least a start... (WT-en) ViMy 14:00, 2 March 2009 (EST)
 * Keep; Even a disambiguation page is more useful than the current article. The fact that someone started it suggests we might get articles, sometime in the future. Even if we don't, a gap has at least been identified. - (WT-en) Huttite 07:35, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:16, 25 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Result: Deleted by User:(WT-en) Cacahuate on June 16. Recreation as a disambiguation page should be fine.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:02, 5 August 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Las Piedras


text:
Talk:Lassen Volcanic National Park

has the visitor center been built yet?
 * yes. -- (WT-en) Colin 00:19, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Lassen Volcanic National Park


text:
Talk:Las Vegas

The Quad photo
Looks like a fairly anonymous hotel building to me. Is it notable as a building, or should the photo be removed as promotional of the hotel? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem like there's anything notable about it. I'll go ahead and remove the photo. PerryPlanet (talk) 22:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Sleep listings
Alright, I've been doing a lot of clean-up on this page, and I'm wondering how we should handle the Sleep listings, which currently are sorted roughly by where they are in town (Strip, off-Strip, Downtown, further out). Normally, this would be considered a violation of our manual of style; we usually sort Sleep listings by price (budget, mid-range, splurge). But I'm wondering if it makes sense to make an exception for Vegas and keep the current system. In most places, price would probably be the most defining factor for where you stay, but in the case of Vegas, one could make the argument that proximity to the Strip is the biggest factor (and in a real sense, proximity to the Strip is itself a huge indicator of price).

What do others think? Would someone more familiar with Vegas like to weigh in on this? PerryPlanet (talk) 21:09, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

 * (Opinion of an European who's been two times to Las Vegas, probably we have some US and Canadian Wikivoyagers who know more) I would vote for keeping the hotels section as it is. Or if we decide to divide them into our standard price categories, we should definitely have sub-headings inside them indicating whether the hotels are on the Strip or not. The Strip is where "everything" is and if you are staying at some cheaper hotel/motel further away, you will spend a lot of time getting there and back. Distances are quite impressive in Vegas and often buses (once every 30 minutes for other buses than the Deuce and the Express), taxis (expensive in the long run) and cars (probably parking is not very easy) move slowly due to traffic congestion. ϒpsilon (talk) 05:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Agree. Since there are no districts for this article, it's very useful to divide sections by location. Since there are a lot of listings, I would divide it in to two levels: location and price. Order could be either way (divide by price then location, or divide by location then price), but I'm inclined to think having location as the first division would be more useful, since many people probably know already whether they want to be on the Strip or not. --Bigpeteb (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Are escape rooms really relevant?
I noticed 4 detailed listing for Escape rooms have been added. This article is not exactly lacking in things to do in Las Vegas, and the policy Avoid_long_lists states that Wikivoyage is not a yellow pages of everything. I'd suggest these are not critical listings for most travelers.

Should we keep? Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Districts?
We have a lot of listings in the article, so as nobody has suggested this before, I do it now: should we subdivide Las Vegas into districts? It could be done like this: And in the middle, running north-south we have the Strip, or more formally Las Vegas Boulevard plus a block or two east and west. This would be divided into:
 * 1. West of I-15
 * 2. Eastern Las Vegas (east of Paradise Road?)
 * 3. Southern Strip (everything south of Flamingo Road)
 * 4. Central Strip (from Flamingo road to Sahara Avenue)
 * 5. Northern Strip and Downtown (from Sahara Avenue to the freeway 515 or all the way to Owens Avenue which according to Google Maps is the border between Las Vegas and North Las Vegas)
 * 6. North Las Vegas could maybe be included in the hierarchy

What do you think? --ϒpsilon (talk) 04:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Would it make sense to keep the Strip together in one article, since many visitors go there on its own? Ground Zero (talk) 05:24, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * 1. West of I-15
 * 2. Eastern Las Vegas
 * 3. The Strip
 * 4. Downtown
 * 5. North Las Vegas

 * I figured it would make sense to split the Strip into parts because it has so many POIs. --ϒpsilon (talk) 05:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think splitting the Strip into three pieces like that would be confusing and make the article difficult to use. Ground Zero's suggestion seems better, but I wonder if it would be simpler to combine the north, east, and west parts into a single "Outskirts" district, or just to keep everything in one article. I've only been to Las Vegas twice, though, so others may know better. But I feel strongly that we shouldn't have separate articles for the Strip north and south of Flamingo Road. —Granger (talk · contribs) 06:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Dividing the article into just "on Strip" and "off Strip" districts wouldn't do much more than breaking the article, as about 3 out of 4 POIs (or even more?) are on the Strip. Better to keep everything in the one article then. ϒpsilon (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I did quick counts, which may not be perfect. The See listings, there are 12 on Strip, 9 Downtown, and 9 elsewhere. In the Do listings, there are 46 on Strip, 25 Downtown and elsewhere, not including "Events", which don't have locations identified. Also, the main city article would hold all of the Get in, Get around, Cope, Stay Safe, Go next info, while the district articles would take the many, many See, Do, Buy, Eat, Drink, Sleep listings, so splitting either as I've suggested or as Granger has would address the issue of this being a long and unwieldy article in a useful way. Ground Zero (talk) 14:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, the 77 Sleep listings was what got me thinking about districtifying LV.
 * Anyways, let's agree then to keep the whole Strip in one article even if it has a ton POIs and is surprisingly long. Overall Las Vegas was IMO very spread out (I've visited Las Vegas twice) especially away from the Strip, and this is why I think one single "Outskirts" article wouldn't be enough. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Continuing on this discussion, Henderson sits right next to Las Vegas, and the border between them zig-zags (see Mapnik layer) and isn't otherwise noticable unless you have a map (see Google streetview for instance). So I think Henderson could be included in the East article, and we could call the district "East and Henderson". I would also include the south of the city (south of Mandalay Bay and the Welcome to Las Vegas sign) in this article. This would give us the following: 1. Strip, 2. West of I-15, 3. Downtown, 4. North Las Vegas, 5. East and Henderson. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:18, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's how the districts would look like: User:Ypsilon. . --ϒpsilon (talk) 09:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Ypsilon, thanks for all of that work. These articles look great. The Strip article is long, but I think it makes sense to keep it together as that's how the visitor will experience it. Great job. Ground Zero (talk) 12:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The ping didn't work for me for some reason, so re-pinging . These districts look good to me. (Though I'll say again that I've only been to Las Vegas twice and others may know better than I do.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:24, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I've been to Las Vegas twice as well, for a total of about two weeks, and tried to get around and see as much as possible (to me, Las Vegas is a "little" more just a couple hour's drive or flight away, so I didn't really feel like sitting around in one hotel :)). I'm by no means a Las Vegas expert though (especially as the attractions keep changing continuously).
 * is also apparently familiar with Vegas to some degree (as per edit history and user name) — do you have any opinion about the districts? --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll wait until the weekend and, unless there are any objections, publish the districts and district map. --ϒpsilon (talk) 12:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Vegas is now districtified. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Raiders
It looks like this is the proper page for the information to land once the move of the Raiders is complete. Though, I think it's actually not happening until the 2020 season. Just leaving a heads-up, hopelessly ahead of time. L. Challenger (talk) 11:02, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Map
Imho the dynamic map should be shaded with districts. Whether or not the Montreal line should be shown is another issue but I lean towards yes. Hobbitschuster (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission information and may be deleted: You can see the details at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The Las Vegas Monorail.jpg

 * This will be deleted in short order, due to lack of permission. Any thoughts? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would meet our Exemption Doctrine Policy to keep locally. Point 4 says "Photographs of copyrighted artwork (such as maps) should not be uploaded if free images or text can serve the same purpose." —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. Straight-up copyright violation, IMO. Let's remove it tomorrow if no-one has a convincing argument for why there's a justification for ignoring the copyright notice at the bottom of this pageIkan Kekek (talk) 10:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

New airport name
I went through this article and changed the airport name from McCarran to Harry Reid, but I realized when I was about to move the McCarran International Airport article that I shouldn't do that unilaterally, so I may have jumped the gun a little here. Please participate in a discussion at Talk:McCarran International Airport. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Las Vegas


text:
Talk:Las Vegas (disambiguation)

I think it's reasonably clear that the Las Vegases meet one of the "exception" criteria pertaining to disambiguation; the town in New Mexico is perhaps one one-hundredth the size of Sin City, and receives maybe one ten-thousandth the attention. Hence the way this page is set up. Feel free to revise if you must, but it would be nice to know why. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 09:53, 27 April 2006 (EDT)

 * I agree that this seems right to me. Wikipedia:Las Vegas (disambiguation) has a couple more in Mexico, Spain, and Venezuela, but we should probably deal with those as they come up. --(WT-en) Evan 10:25, 27 April 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Las Vegas (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Latina

Photo linking help
Two of the photos I just attempted to link are on Wikipedia, not Wikimedia Commons:

,

I suppose these should be transferred to Commons? How do I do that?

Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

 * Nevermind. However, if anyone wants to add more photos in the future, please keep in mind that there are some photos in the Italian Wikipedia article that have not been transferred to Commons. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Latina


text:
Talk:Latin America

Do anything with this article?
Should we do anything with this article or should it remain the pretty useless stubby list it is now? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I expanded it a bit. Copy-editing and giving examples other than those I happen to be familiar with much welcome. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:25, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Perón and Castro in one breath with the "pink tide"?
First of all, the decisive moment of the pink tide was that they were elected and not overthrown (unlike - say - Allende in Chile). So Castro while perhaps important does not fit that mold as he never won a democratic election (or held one). As for Perón being a leftist, I think there are quite a few people who would vehemently disagree with that, not least because Perón had pretty blatant Nazi sympathies and chose franquist Spain as his exile. Also, what on earth does the year 1973 have to do with Perón's rise? Yes it was the year of his last presidency, but he died the following year... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was my mistake. It should have been 1946. But one thing Perón did was to institute protectionist policies that made it very difficult for foreign companies to do business in Argentina, which is most certainly a left-wing position. Perón was hated by the upper-class elites, but loved by the masses of working-class Argentinians, which would generally place him on the left. Traditionally, the right fought for the interests of the nobility, while the left fought for the interests of the working class. But yes, I do acknowledge that people can have both left and right wing positions. Take Donald Trump for example. His position on immigration (and many other things like climate change, race relations, religion, etc.) is most certainly right-wing, but his position on international trade is most certainly a left-wing one. The dog2 (talk) 21:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * There are - and have always been - anti-protectionist left wingers. Just like there have been leftist hawks and right wing doves. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * In any case, I think these two should be mentioned in some form because of their notability. And I would even say we could even include the role of the U.S. in bringing down some democratically-elected leaders in favour of U.S.-friendly dictators, or even their attempted assassination of Fidel Castro. The dog2 (talk) 21:45, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * US influence is mentioned earlier in the history paragraph. Remember that this is an attempt at the impossible, a history of Latin America without extreme generalization that still doesn't get bogged down in details. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

French-speaking countries

 * For the record, French Guiana, Haiti, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Saint-Barthélemy etc etc, qualify as Latin American, too. Even Quebec might have a claim. Ibaman (talk) 00:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Too much detail but not enough breadth?
The danger in the "History" section is, as Hobbitschuster wrote in 2018, getting bogged down in details (that I'd add aren't clearly travel-relevant), but what's lacking in the history is highlights of pre-Columbian civilizations. I think I'll add a little. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

 * I added a bit on pre-Columbian civilizations, but more can be added as long as it's readable and clearly travel-relevant. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Map?
The map should be fixed to correctly show countries in Latin America. It looks like it is excluding Guatemala, Panama, Ecuador and Brazil. Bizarre! Mrkstvns (talk) 21:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Latin America


text:
Talk:Latvia

CIA data
CIA data moved to Talk:Latvia/CIA World Factbook 2002 import (WT-en) Matthewmayer 16:43, 28 Dec 2003 (PST)

Price ranges
In Latvia what price ranges would be considered Budget, Mid-range, and Splurge? - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 17:39, 11 June 2006 (EDT)

Added information about mafia to Stay safe
Two days ago three of my friends with which I have been to Riga were robbed by mafia in a bar - asked for 200 Ls each, then beaten, after they've called the police it was cooperating with the mafia, asked for a bribe of 300 Ls saying "I know you are the Americans and you have money" and finally fined for "violence in the bar". The U.S. Embassy employees were familiar with the situation saying that occurs in Riga often and one of the U.S. Embassy employees had that experience too. Although they can provide list of places where not to go and it would be wise to ask for it before partying. My personal experience is that if you don't visit these clubs, you are generally safe. --89.79.35.19 16:39, 16 November 2008 (EST)

 * Asking people to contact the embassy for lists of bars to avoid is unhelpful and unlikely. Instead, I've linked to Common scams, which covers the "newly found friend invites you to bar" scam in detail. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:52, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Cesis not in city list
Cesis is highlighted in the intro but not included in the list of 9 cities. I suggest adding it to the list, but not sure which one to take out, to keep the list to 9. Perhaps remove Valka, or Daugavpils, maybe Ventspils. Thoughts? Nurg (talk) 02:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd remove Valka, Valga part is bigger and listed in Estonia article. Jjtkk (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Certainly not Daugavpils, it's both the second largest city of Latvia and the only city in that part of the country mentioned in the list. Valga/Valka on the other hand is quite small and is already in Estonia's article. Ypsilon (talk) 08:52, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, Valka should be removed. It is a very boring city. Daugavpils is one of the biggest Latvian cities, and Ventspils is a big harbour. Both deserve to be highlighted. --Alexander (talk) 09:17, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone. Confirmed my thinking. Have replaced Valka with Cesis. Nurg (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Misleading illustration
In "Do" section the nice photo "Bridge over Venta in Kuldiga" depicts the river in the forest in the other country. Same river flows across Kuldiga too, plenty of photos of both Kuldiga and the famous bridge everywhere, i assume the picture was inserted deliberately so do not edit anything. Maybe more misleading info? :).

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Daugava river at the sunset (8228968205).jpg

Russian language
according to my experience, the reason is not in Russian-Latvian politics at all, but because a few local Russian speakers refusing to speak Latvian. I'd say that attitude towards foreigners speaking Russian is not negative at all (some Latvians even consider many Russians from Russia educated and bright people), since it is an international language and Latvian speakers happily speak Russian in Georgia, for example. Soshial (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I'd suggest editing accordingly, as you have personal experience, but you could wait 24 hours for The dog to reply. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 * If you have local experience then go ahead. I just remember some of the younger Latvians on exchange programmes in university who did not speak Russian, and spoke English instead. But I've not been to Latvia myself, so I don't know how common that is. Speaking of which, here's an example of an ethnic Russian from Latvia who knows how to speak Latvian, though I have no idea how common or rare people like her are.

 * As for language and politics, they do often get intertwined. For instance, in Hong Kong, many people will get offended if you speak to them in Mandarin because they see that as an indication that you support China. But I'm not as familiar with the situation in the Baltics, so go ahead and write what you know. The dog2 (talk) 13:19, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Latvia


text: Talk:Latvian phrasebook

title: Talk:Latvian phrasebook


text:
Talk:Latvija 2005

Hello,

While your contributions to this article are appreciated, please be aware that this is the English language version of Wikivoyage. See Project:Language version policy for discussions of how to begin versions in other languages. At the moment this page has been recommended for deletion since it is not an English page, but please feel free to translate it into English if you would like to. -- (WT-en) Ryan 04:11, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)

title: Talk:Latvija 2005


text:
Talk:Launceston

Is it George or Gorge? --(WT-en) CoonCat89 20:35, 17 May 2009 (EDT)
 * By George, it is not George it is Gorge I'll fix it now.. (considering it was probably my sloppy typing that made it that way in the first place!).   --(WT-en) Inas 20:41, 17 May 2009 (EDT)
 * good to see it cleaned up. --(WT-en) CoonCat89 20:44, 17 May 2009 (EDT)

Are there still monkeys at the park? How is transport from the airport? 124.171.106.103 18:07, 1 September 2010 (EDT)

Banner
I don't know much about Launceston, but I do know the bridge is an iconic part of Launceston. Unfortunately, current banner is somewhat hazy and doesn't really show the bridge well as the focus goes on Cataract Gorge instead. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Banner 1. Ground Zero (talk) 11:16, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

 * ✅. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Launceston


text:
Talk:Launceston (Cornwall)

Comments
Apologies that this page doesn't look very good. I'd like it to look like the Bude page, but I'm not sure how to.
 * It's fixed. (WT-en) WindHorse 06:35, 20 January 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Launceston (Cornwall)


text:
Talk:Laurentians

Hi,

Just to let you know that the text used is from the Official Tourisme Laurentides Website (www.laurentides.com). Tourisme Laurentides gave us the mandate to fill different wiki with a specific text to introduce the Laurentians region.

We are allowed to use this text. If you have any question, just let me know :

laurentides@laurentides.com

+ is there any way to link to an external page in this article?

Name change
To me (from Ottawa), Laurentides is French and we should use the common English name, the Laurentians. Any objections to a move? (WT-en) Pashley 08:33, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Laval?
How did Laval end up in the Laurentides? It's an island in the St. Lawrence and a Montréal suburb, so may be a better fit there? K7L (talk) 17:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation
In English, is it pronounced "Lauren-tides" or the French way - "Lora(n)-teed" or thereabouts? This should be mentioned in the article.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * In English, it's pronounced Lo-ren-shuns, unless you're talking about the beer, then it's Lor-en-tides, as in "I picked up a two-four of Laurentides for  the May Two-Four long weekend, eh?" Any Anglo-Quebecers out there are welcome to correct me. I've never heard Lor-en-tides used to refer to the region in English. Ground Zero (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I notice that Pashley proposed some time ago to change the article's name along those lines. Ordinarily that's how I'd propose solving this, but the problem with that idea is the Quebec government uses "Laurentides" in its official tourist literature in English as well as French, so it's up for debate whether "Laurentians" really is the proper English name for the region. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Wow. That was ten years ago. I've just redirected "Laurentians" here. I'm not that fussed about it. I don't know what the policy says on common name vs. official name. Actually I do, but Quebec is very much a distinct society, so there may be an argument for not applying the general policy. Ground Zero (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, I must be losing my mind or something. I was in Mont-Tremblant just four or five days ago, and I typed that whole bit about "the Quebec government uses 'Laurentides' in its official tourist literature in English as well as French" while the "Official Laurentians Tourist Guide" from "Tourism Laurentians" that I got from the hotel was sitting next to me on my desk. Given that, I'm going to do a complete 180 and say we have a pretty airtight case for moving this article to Laurentians. Any objections, ThunderingTyphoons!, Ground Zero, or Pashley? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * None at all. Allez-y.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Vas-y. Comme amis, nous pouvouns nous tutoyons. Ground Zero (talk) 17:44, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:58, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Certainly no objection here. Pashley (talk) 01:05, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Removing points of interest
why have you removed these three points of interest from the article? Your edit summary said "all three of these are already listings in their respective city article".

Region article template/See says: "This is for an overview of the types of attractions as well as the principal attractions in the region. Don't give full details about each attraction; you should have that in the article for the city where the attraction is. "

The information you removed on the park, house and gardens, and cosmodome informed readers of what to see in the region, and did not include detailed address, phone, hours and price information. The point of having a See section in a region article is to give the reader a general idea of why they might want to go there before they dive into the city articles. Deleting the whole section leaves the reader wondering what there is to see in the region. I agree that the details about the Buddhist temple should be moved to a city article. Ground Zero (talk) 10:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 * The "See" section of region articles should obviously have content; however, as the infobox that Ikan Kekek added indicates, it should not include listings, which are what I removed from that section. Furthermore, none of those listings were for the Laurentians' most prominent attractions, so simply converting the information in them to paragraphs of prose wouldn't have been sufficient. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 13:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a policy that sights can't be in a template and must be in prose? I haven't been able to find that policy. If it is a policy, I don't think that removing content because it is not correctly formatted builds the project, or is best for travellers. My practice is to keep the content and fix the formatting. Content should always come first.
 * The infobox added by Ikan Kekek says that detailed listings should not be in the article, and these were not detailed listings.
 * I selected those sights from the city articles on the region. I think it is better to have some sights than none. If you disagree with my selection, you are free to propose alternatives. Blanking the section does not improve the article. It makes it worse.
 * I ask for your help in making this a useful article for travellers. I don't think that removing content does that. Ground Zero (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's not let persnickety semantic issues about the specific wording of policy distract us from the intent of that policy, which I think is pretty self-evident: what would be the logic of forbidding detailed listings, yet permitting far less detailed and thus far less useful listings? The fact that the goal is to deter the listing format, rather than detailed information, seems obvious enough to me that policy shouldn't have to spell it out in black and white. At any rate, see Eastern Shore (Maryland), Northern Territory, and Chicago - all Guide or better-level articles - for what we've always interpreted policy to prescribe for the "See" sections of regions or districtified Huge Cities: descriptions in general terms of the types of attractions to be found there, perhaps name-checking a few of the biggest ones but always doing so inline within a block of prose, rather than as listings. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's not read into the policy what it doesn't say, and let's not use formatting as a justification for blanking out content. It's not being "persnickety" to ask for policy over one editor's personal preferences. It is self-evident that having three sights listed without detailed listing information, as the policy actually says, in templates is more useful to travellers than having nothing.
 * What do you think are better sights to list than these? Please answer this question so that we can work together to improve the article. Ground Zero (talk) 23:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * With regard to your comment "The fact that the goal is to deter the listing format, rather than detailed information...." That is clearly your opinion, to which you are entitled. I have a different opinion. I ask that you respect that others have different opinions from you by not trying to assert your position as "fact". It isn't. Ground Zero (talk) 03:25, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Pardon me for entering this discussion, but this should be simple. If these are duplicate listings, those listings should be merged into one in the most appropriate article. If these are not duplicate listings, why delete them? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 00:12, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * In a region level article, according to Region article template, the See section "... is for an overview of the types of attractions as well as the principal attractions in the region." So we're talking about mentioning the principal attractions of the region. The detailed information about those attractions goes in the city-level articles. This isn't about duplicate listings. Ground Zero (talk) 02:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Listing format is not used; otherwise, these are listings. I guess we have to debate this suddenly at Wikivoyage talk:Region article template? If so, the existing Wikivoyage talk:Region article template thread is pretty relevant. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I read through Wikivoyage talk:Region article template to see if there was discussion about not using templates, and I couldn't find anything. But this is not a big deal for me. I can put the information into prose. The problem I have is that content has been removed just because someone doesn't like the format. I think formatting is important (better user experience --> more readers), but it is never more important than content. Blanking a section because of formatting does not put the traveller first. Ground Zero (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You keep framing this as a case of me removing the content because I personally don't like listings in region articles, when in reality it has little to do with my personal preference (of which I don't even have any). Ground Zero, Wikivoyage existed for twelve years before you made your first edit here and in all that time, no one has ever interpreted this policy in any other way than "the fact that the goal is to deter the listing format, rather than detailed information". Do you really think that's just a coincidence? Far be it from me to assume bad faith, but it frankly sounds to me more like your personal preference is for the listing format and you've simply found a loophole in the wording of policy on which to base an argument. For my part, when the letter of policy conflicts with the spirit of policy, I think the latter supersedes the former. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I see; we're moving listings out of here because they belong in city articles. On the whole, that seems reasonable. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 13:22, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Andre completely, and I've been here longer by far than he. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

First, there is no basis for deleting content because it is badly formatted. The "nutshell" summary of Plunge_forward says: "Don't worry about being perfect or making mistakes. If something needs to be done, do it. Jump in and make useful edits to articles." We would not advise that if we were planning to revert contributions that have formatting errors. So I will restore this information. If you want to add other sights to the list, please do so. The section would benefit from more information. Blanking the section makes the article less useful for travellers.

Second, after I've told you "But this is not a big deal for me. I can put the information into prose", claiming that "it frankly sounds to me more like your personal preference is for the listing format" is antagonistic. I have demonstrated a commitment to Wikivoyage through article creation, upgrading articles from outline to usable (including this article), initiating new policies, combatting vandals, nominating at least one new administrator, and cleaning up formatting, touting, and poorly-written articles. Claiming that my position is the opposite of what I have stated it to be is absolutely accusing me of bad faith. That is a jerk move.

Third, the policy does not say that listing templates are prohibited. I get that two long-standing editors have interpreted the policy to mean that, so let's change it to clearly reflect your interpretation and not trip up other editors. I've worked my way through the Atlantic Canada region articles and part of Quebec, upgrading 20 region articles from outline to usable by adding content, some of it in templates, but never including detailed listing information. Now I find out that the interpretation is different. I don't want to see all of my work building these articles undone because I have broken an unwritten formatting rule. Let's make the policy clear by explicitly prohibiting the use of templates. I will support that change.

Finally, the claim that no one has ever interpreted this policy in any other way than "the fact that the goal is to deter the listing format, rather than detailed information" is fatuous. The policy uses the term "detailed listing information" and does not use the term "listing format". Most of our region articles are outlines because very few editors take on the job of bringing them up to the usable level. So the issue has not come up very much. For example, of the five region articles you created within Gaspé Peninsula five years ago, only one of them is usable now. The rest are pretty much just lists of destinations with a map and a picture of a lighthouse.

Again, throwing your weight around as a long-standing editor really does send a message to newer editors. I've been contributing for 3½ years now. If you are aiming to make newer editors feel unwelcome, continue to throw around longevity as an excuse for interpreting an unclear policy. Ground Zero (talk) 03:00, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

 * You're a newer editor than we are, but I think and certainly hope you've been here long enough not to be at risk of leaving in a huff because we're telling you how a policy has been understood since the beginning. Telling you that doesn't devalue any of the extremely valuable work you do. I would find it very tiresome to have to debate a form of words to add a black and white discouragement of using listing templates in region articles, though since it's come up, I guess we'll have to IMO waste time on it... Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Likewise, I would also hate to see you leave in a huff because a newer editor who has been contributing in good faith genuinely misunderstood a policy that two other editors believe should be interpreted to mean something. I have proposed wording here to avoid this confusion in the future. If there are no objections to it, then I can add it to the policy, and avoid the time wasted on discussions like the one above. I would rather spend my time improving region articles like this one. Ground Zero (talk) 03:29, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Laurentians


text:
Talk:Lausanne

But guys, I just want to print and to take my plane, not search all the fullres maps.
 * If I print the "printable version" I get an unreadable map of Laussane. I know, the map is great in fullres version.

=

Hey! You wiped out my stub stuff! I find that stuff really useful when I go through and do the research to put the addresses and phone numbers in. -- (WT-en) Mark 10:36, 5 Jan 2004 (EST)

Sorry about that-- I know they're helpful to you, but they can be really confusing for people reading the content. We're kinda trying to think of the readers now as well as the "content providers." If you want, I'll put them back in, but it does make the page a little harder to parse for real (as opposed to template) information... (WT-en) Majnoona

 * It's a good point. After thinking about it I believe I've come around to agreeing with you on this.  From now on I'm going to try to gather all of the information for stuff right away when I put it in.  Thanks! -- (WT-en) Mark 05:12, 15 Jan 2004 (EST)

 * I'm always so happy when people agree with me ;-). Anyway, the way I do it is to keep copies of the templates in a textfile and just cut & paste the part I'm working on-- I don't think it's a biggie if there is _some_ template stuff in it _sometimes_. Thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona

One map inset or two?
Hi all! I'm trying to decide if it makes sense to the others to have two insets for the wide-area map in Lausanne or just the one. I'd like to hear opinions from folks who've never been there and only know the town from the article, as well as from people who've visited. Here are what I see as the pros and cons to making a single Center/Ouchy inset as opposed to two separate ones:

Points which favour of a single Center/Ouchy inset:
 * More cohesion. A single inset would make it clearer to users that Ouchy isn't really all that far away.
 * Easier maintenance. A single inset would make it easier to maintain the listings, and their icons.
 * A single download. A user needs to print only once to get a map with all but a few of the listings, or twice if they choose to print the wide area map.

Points which favour the existing two insets:

 * Smaller individual image size. The individual images download faster than the bigger one would.
 * Possibly reduced legibility. Some street names might become more difficult to read especially if I try to optimise the larger inset.

Anyhow, I'd love to hear some opinions. Of course I'll try to make up my own mind anyhow... I think I'm leaning toward a single inset. -- (WT-en) Mark

 * Provided no details are lost, one map should work nicely - it is a bit unusual to have an article with three maps on it, and not being familiar with Lausanne it took me a minute to figure out what each of them was. If the major concern is space/tidiness, the overview map might be a better candidate for deletion as it is seems less useful than the other two, and it was very clear by looking at the train station that the Central & Ouchy maps were extensions of one another. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 15:03, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Hi Ryan, Thanks for the feedback!  I think you might be right about the overview map, since most of it is residential, and of course it will still be there in the SVG version anyhow.  I've resisted getting rid of it, but that might just be an emotional reaction on my part having spent so much time making the shapefile.  I guess the only real non-emotional reason to keep it is that there are a couple of attractions which are only visible on the overview, like the Musée d'Art Brut, the Hermitage, and the Tour de Sauvebelin.. but I could just extend the old town map a little to get at least the Art Brut in, because that's the real stand-out. -- (WT-en) Mark 16:40, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Mark, Are you interested in sharing the shapefiles? They are great if you happen to be wandering around with a pda with gps and mapping software!  Thanks, Tim  (WT-en) Fat wombat 00:15, 7 August 2006 (EDT)

Local style convention question
I assume for stuff like "Mudac, place de la Cathédral 6," we should be capitalizing stuff in the local style. But I see inconsistent caps on place, rte, ave and maybe a few others -- I'm not familiar with usage conventions in these languages, so I need a clue. Also, are rte and ave abbreviations? Do they need a period after them? -- (WT-en) Colin 16:33, 3 March 2006 (EST)

 * Capitalization is strictly optional for that sort of thing in French. For the most part they prefer to capitalize less stuff rather than more, because in German one capitalizes every single noun, and they like to be able to recognize the difference in print apparently from a distance. -- (WT-en) Mark 08:57, 4 March 2006 (EST)

Net Lounge
This internet place was removed but no reason was given-- Mark or someone, is this place gone? (WT-en) Majnoona 14:04, 26 March 2006 (EST)

 * It's still there. I'm in a rush at the moment or I'd add it back myself. -- (WT-en) Mark 02:52, 28 March 2006 (EST)

Brasserie Artisanale
Hi Mark, I appreciate that you mentioned about the sign -- but, the service is (or was) indeed really slow, especially during the weekend. Last time was our second time to wait at least 20 minutes from asking to actually getting the bill! Another friend also had problem that the waiter came with just the number and said he already threw the bill to the garbage. I did not mean any harm by saying that their service is far from excellent -- I just think it's important that people know that they can't rush here. So they should avoid going there if they have limited time (such as having to catch a train or a movie afterwards). But their pizzas are indeed superb, and might worth all the waiting...! (WT-en) sixzilly 13:35, 16 June 2006 (EDT)

Lausanne Marathon?
anyone gonna write sth about this event? (WT-en) Boggie 10:22, 21 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I hadn't planned to do so. Feel free. -- (WT-en) Mark 11:14, 21 September 2006 (EDT)

XIIIème Siècle
hi all, as far as i can recall, the price for a glass beer is 6 CHF, rather than 7 stated in the article. any additional clue? -- (WT-en) Boggie 08:44, 10 February 2007 (EST)
 * Feel free to fix it, or else I will. -- (WT-en) Mark 16:49, 10 February 2007 (EST)

Maps
Can someone (Mark perhaps?) who is familiar with Lausanne do an update to the maps so that all info in the article is shown on them? Also, there seems to be a lot of "buy" icons around the map that aren't in the map key... Thanks! – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 19:34, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

Olympic Museum
Carl Lewis, while a great Olympian, wasn't known for his golden spikes. Michael Johnson was. Whose shoes are in the museum? It's on the Wikivoyage front page right now, and it would be great if it were right.--76.118.153.210 22:26, 15 January 2008 (EST)

 * Carl Lewis it is: http://www.olympic.org/uk/passion/museum/permanent/summer/shoes_uk.asp--71.232.97.199 13:10, 29 January 2008 (EST)

Languages
In the introduction it says "Lausanne is a French speaking city, but Swiss-German and Italian are also spoken." It's certainly French speaking here, but very little Italian or [Swiss-]German appears to be spoken. My girlfriend is German, and finds very few German speakers. She always tries English first. Suggest changing to simply "Lausanne is a French speaking city."?

Getting In
Hey all this is a great article - could have used it last time I was there. But can somebody add a "By Car" section for getting in? It's not the most common way to get there, but it is possible, and the more info the better

weather
early november weather - what can I expect? --205.188.116.11 12:26, 4 October 2009 (EDT)woody embry 10/4/2009

Increasing the maps' visibility
I'm surprised to see a star article with maps that are too small to read unless I click on them three times (and even then, they could really be a lot better, as the street names are quite small). These guides are supposed to be usable as printouts. I'm tempted to nominate this article for de-starring unless this problem is addressed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, I can find no record of a star discussion of Lausanne at all - see Star nominations/Archives. So I'm going to downgrade the article to Guide. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Seems it became a star in November 2005, before the process was established. Not sure if the star status should be maintained. Jjtkk (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm the one to blame for the thumbnail sized maps :). The maps were almost the only illustrations in the map so I myself also wondered how the heck such an article could be a star. Also, the article was and still is so (relatively) short that I had to shrink the maps (the maps in San Francisco's star articles also have to be clicked on before you can read them) in order to make space for pictures, otherwise I'd have to put the pictures of the sights somewhere down in the Eat section. Of course, most of our articles have less content than Lausanne, and I found it quite helpful on a day trip last week. ϒpsilon (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You can't downgrade articles unilaterally. A de-star nomination has to be filed to give others the chance to fix issues with it. Besides, the maps looked fine before. And Ypsilon, this is a star article, so you have to be cautious with making rigorous changes to the formatting. Globe-trotter (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've now filed a de-star nomination for Lausanne because of the inadequate maps.
 * ϒpsilon: this is no reflection whatever on your edits, which improved our article. It's just that my understanding is that Star articles should showcase the very best of our work and act as exemplars for editors working on other articles.
 * Discussion point: would a dynamic map(s) be an adequate "quick fix"? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh dear! I see that the current criteria for Star status for a city, include "Has a tourist-style map, in Wikivoyage style with modifiable vector source, showing how to get around the destination, with major attractions, restaurants, etc. that match the listings in the guide" - so no quick fix there then. Or do the mapping criteria need to change to allow the more easily maintainable dynamic maps? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've read through Lausanne and invite everyone who thinks it is a sure "star" to do the same. I don't really care to comment about the maps but the article has some MoS issues. For example the currency is written in many different ways, there are listings lacking descriptions and so on. Moreover, I hope that all of the information - especially places like hotels, bars and restaurants - contained in the article and "burnt" into the hand drawn maps is completely up to date, as is required of a star article. Maybe in places like Pyongyang hotels, bars and restaurants don't close, move or change their opening hours, contact information, prices etc. that frequently but everywhere else they have a tendency of doing just that. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Valid points, ϒpsilon.
 * With many cities it is a Sisyphean task to keep a static map either clear and crisp or comprehensive and up-to-date with all the various listings.
 * As far as currency formats go, you might like to comment at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency. --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

updating
The Eat section is OK, but there are some places I should list that are still missing. Drink does still need work. -- Mark (talk) 08:14, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

English variety
Right now, I see this article being changed from British to US English. Is one form of English favo(u)red over the other in Switzerland? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Switzerland in general uses BE, the international missions in Geneva and its employees spread AE quite extensively due to the shear amount of expats. jan (talk) 12:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Usually making edits just to change the variety of English is to be deprecated. However, in the case of bringing/restoring an article to Star status, G-T is fully justified in trying to get the article to use a consistent variety since that is mandated by Star status. The perennial and thorny question is whether US English should be used? The federal authorities of the Swiss Confederation, the army and other national institutions do not use US English, but rather Commonwealth English of a very high standard - as does the public education system. Although CH is neither a member of the EU or the EEA, it does participate at a gouvernement and bilateral level in their workings where the official variety is Commonwealth English and, consequently, many of its official translators use a non-US variety of English. However, I would suggest that what is more important here is the cantonal choice of variety of English and what is used in the wider francophone area of Switzerland. My vote, if I'm allowed one, would, predictably, be for non-US English.

 * What I do think is a bit of a stretch, because of the locally popular time format of 18h00-02h00, is to change (the absolutely correct formatting according to our MoS of) "hours=18:00-02:00 | price=CHF4" to "hours=6PM - 2AM | price=4 CHF" (as happened at line 334 of this edit). I would venture to suggest that we should not use the ugly US time format in any Swiss guide.
 * Current policy is:
 * "Use one of these formats: 09:30–17:00 or 9:30AM–5PM. Do not use both 24- and 12-hour formats within one article. Choose between formats by following predominant local usage. Ask yourself which format visitors will see in timetables, on shop doors and in newspapers."
 * The ugly US format is rare to vanishing (outside of US tourist oriented businesses) in Lausannne.

 * I also deprecate changing the currency format from a consistent use of the "CHF20" construction to "20 CHF" (without a non-breaking space to avoid the amount and the currency designation being separated on different lines) because of the reasoning of users PeterFitzgerald and LtPowers expressed here: Wikivoyage_talk:Currency. Even if their opinions are ignored, the current policy written at $ is "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved).

 * May I just gently correct jan? Officially, many of the better known international organisations in Geneva use Oxford English spelling (a bit "American" in its use of zed/zee and which even has its own language code of en-GB-oed): Amnesty International, the International Baccalaureate Organization, the International Committee of the Red Cross, World Health Organization (WHO), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the International Labour Organization (ILO), UNESCO, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the World Trade Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Interpol.

 * Normally, because of the enormous amount of hard work put in by G-T in attempting to use consistent constructions I would not suggest restoring more locally familiar and natural time formats, nor in bringing the currency format back into policy compliance. However, I understand that he is pretty handy in using the AWB tool, so the effort might not be too onerous? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

 * I do agree that the 24 hours format could be used, I just applied the AM/PM format because that was already applied throughout the article. I just made them consistent throughout. If anyone feels like converting all of them to the 24 hours format, that's welcomed. Same story for the currency. I looked at what was most commonly used and applied it consistently. If someone feels like placing CHF in front everywhere (consistently) it's fine I suppose. I don't think there are any real guidelines for Swiss currency usage. The "growing like topsy" is an interesting discussion, but not a policy that's in place.

 * About the variety, American English should be used per Spelling, as all countries without a history of British English are written in American English. But also in this case, American English was already prevalent, but I saw some British terms, so I applied some consistency to it. About AWB: it's a handy tool, but I don't think it's easy to convert time formats with it. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Gadzooks! What a pity that AWB can not help with the time formatting.
 * As far as the currency goes, do you not think that wv:aou and the current policy written at $ that "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved) authorise at least the currency formatting changes I so laboriously made by hand in this edit? The Swiss franc symbol of CHF is not one of "...the currencies noted...". --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

 * The examples on that page, DKK, NOK, SEK, clearly prefer a post-suffixed currency format if three letter codes are used. But I'm not sure if these ISO codes should be used at all. Wikipedia states "The ISO code of the currency used by banks and financial institutions is CHF, although "Fr." is used by most businesses and advertisers". Globe-trotter (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

CHF before the price with no space

 * My proposal at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency is made partly to avoid having these kind of discussions about more than 100 different currencies, Globe-trotter.

 * However, the discussion here should focus more narrowly. Fortunately(?) at the time this discussion started here, there were no examples of the common "Fr." format (or any other abbreviations or symbolisations) used in the article - our whole article featured various upper and lower case and positional varieties of "CHF". So, can we limit the discussion to whether the three capitalised letters CHF go before or after the amount? Before the amount is more common in the English speaking world and has the advantages of being one character shorter in the print version (and 6 in code) and not needing the (messy and difficult for newbies to understand and use) non breaking space HTML entity of " ". I'd also submit it's much more in line with the spirit (and, I would submit, the essence) of "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved). --W. Franke-mailtalk 17:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It states "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount". So we should be prefixing Fr. instead of using the ISO code. The examples specifically show that ISO codes shouldn't be used. Globe-trotter (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Why? The Fr. construction is by no means universally encountered in Lausanne. This is not a scientific survey, but none of the first ten websites mentioned in the article use the "Fr." construction:, , , , , , , , , , --W. Franke-mailtalk 22:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * None of the formats is universally applied, that's the problem in the first place. Three letter currency codes have always been avoided because they look very formal and are mostly used by banks and financial institutions. However, it's better to continue this discussion at Currency, it's not really related to the article for Lausanne. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd welcome your comments at Currency, Globe-trotter. However, I would hope that we would want to get a lot more articles to Star status and, unless we change our stance on consistent internal formatting of articles, we do need to choose a consistent format for prices both for this article and for many others. Hence my proposal - as I've said already, to provide some central and consistent and easy to edit and read guidance in our MoS rather than individually on thousands of article discussion pages. I don't think it's appropriate to see Fr. 34 in our Lausanne article, 34 Franken in our Zurich article, 34 CHF in our Grisons article, 34 franchi in our Campione d'Italia, Chf 34 in our Berne article, I'd like the Wikivoyage MoS to offer some coherent advice here to avoid these kind of time-wasting discussions which would be better devoted to improving out travel guide.
 * I also find it interesting that I could find no occurrence of the Fr. construction in our Berne, Geneva, Zurich and Switzerland articles.
 * That sermon delivered, we do need to make an actual decision here so that this article can retain its Star status. My proposition is that we consistently use the CHF34 format. Earlier in this discussion I had hopes that you might have accepted that. Do you have a different concrete proposal now, Globe-trotter - or can I go back to editing appropriately? --W. Franke-mailtalk 22:40, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've been doing some research and checked some other travel guides. The Rough Guide to Switzerland uses the format "Fr.40" and the Lonely Planet uses the format "Sfr40". Currency codes are clearly against the current MoS and this discussion about which format to use has to fall within the guidelines set there. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Other guides use the CHF40 notation. However, you are right in saying elsewhere that our policies should determine the formatting of Star articles and not the other way round, so I would encourage everyone here to write their opinions at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency since, unless and until slight changes to our $ policy are made, it's almost impossible to resolve this issue and restore/preserve this article's Star status! --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I've resolved this issue by trying to use the "CHF before the price with no space" construction throughout now, since there were no additional comments or objections at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency in the last 14 days.

To my mind, the only major thing now standing in the way of continued Star status is the (unnatural for Switzerland) US time format. --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Star article demotion
This article was nominated for a star demotion back on 5th August 2013:

https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Lausanne&diff=2366478&oldid=2366194

This has been more recently discussed on Star_nominations

Since 7 months have transpired, I shall remove the Star status.

Fundamentally the issue seems to be around the current absence of a quality map. If this can be fixed then I would urge someone to renominate this article. Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

 * I added a   template to this discussion, so that people know that this has good potential for Star status Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

 * I've added a dynamic map and tried to ensure a consistent style for prices, times and flavor of English. What else needs doing? BushelCandle (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lausanne


text:
Talk:Lava

I rolled back a note that said, "For help call XXXXXXXXX"; it wasn't clear who was at the other end of the line, nor what kind of help they could give. --(WT-en) Evan 11:27, 29 January 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Lava


text:
Talk:LaVale

Someone please change article name to "La Vale" with a space.
 * That seems very clear. Will do immediately.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:44, 2 March 2010 (EST)
 * The correct spelling is "LaVale" without a space. See: " ."  Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:LaVale


text:
Talk:Lübeck

see also: Talk:Lübeck/Archive

Guide and OtBP/DotM?
What would y'all consider missing for promotion to guide and featuring? (either as DotM or as OtBP, I could go either way on this) Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

 * The first half of the article looks good, though some See listings lack (or have short) descriptions and maybe a photo or two could be moved down to sections with no photos. The clubs and discos from Do should be moved to Drink and get some descriptions (closed ones should of course be deleted), and something has to be done about the short bullet points. Buy could use some individual listings. Eat more listings, probably division into Budget/Mid-range/Splurge. Drink coordinates (and it would be expanded by places from Do mentioned before). Sleep needs some coordinates and descriptions, and maybe a few more places to sleep. Go next looks OK. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The discos have been moved to "drink" and geocoded with a bit of pruning of what appeared to be closed ones... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Great! Lübeck could work both as DotM and OtBP and there's plenty of time to improve the article and nominate it for a summer 2021 slot. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Lübeck - Guide and featuring?
So as can be seen by taking a look at the page history, I did some work on Lübeck, a city I've not been in in a while (sadly) but which I know well from memory and which de-wp covers extensively, no doubt in part due to the positive obsession of its citizens with its history (a tendency evident even in the 1920s written book "Buddenbrooks"). At any rate, the work I did while it may look like it produced many bytes was actually quite slight - we have had a raw diamond sitting around for ages. I know some of the sections that aren't "see" - and there is just so damn much to see on the island alone - are a bit sparse, so I'd really like your input as to how to get this even more polished... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

 * Everything as far as the bottom of 'Get in' looks top-notch. After that, most listings could do with more information, both qualitative stuff and contact details, opening hours etc. 'Get around' could also go into more detail about the different modes, e.g. have links to the bus operator, explain fares, list a few taxi companies etc. Get both of those done and it would be much improved.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lübeck


text:
Talk:Lüneburg

Quick bar
We don't use quickbars for cities, so I'm putting this here. (WT-en) texugo 08:19, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

+44 phone number
One of the listings has a phone number beginning with "+44" - the country code for Germany is "+49" - is this number accurate? Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Boundary between "inner" and "outer" old town
A lot of see listings cluster in and around the old town. Some previous editor has grouped them by a distinction of "inner" and "outer" old town, but unfortunately, it is to me unclear where the boundary lies. What should we do? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lüneburg