text:
Talk:Talk

Origin
Started this based on discussion at. See also Talk:Phrasebook International; I took some text from that article. (WT-en) Pashley 21:20, 22 December 2009 (EST)

 * See also Talk:List_of_phrasebooks --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:46, 3 February 2011 (EST)

The version used seems to be Phrasebook International of 02:38, 26 October 2009. --LPfi (talk) 14:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Image for Travel topic:World languages
I made an image, knowingly http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Main_world_languages.png Perhaps this image could be made for a new travel topic:World languages; intented to explain the world languages best learnt for global travel. 87.64.58.218 06:11, 13 December 2009 (EST)

We do have an article like that somewhere, but concerning the map, I think there are some errors. If "light yellow" (English as a second language) is the color used in South Korea and Japan, I would call that misleading... Shouldn't all of Quebec be green (French)? More of central Asia knows Russian, Kenyans and Tanzanians speak English as a second language, The "light black" is actually dark green, are you sure that Mandarin is known by all of Southeast Asia?, etc. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 17:29, 13 December 2009 (EST)

 * Quite a nice idea but some problems with the implementation. In addition to the errors pointed out by ChubbyWimbus above:
 * Malaysia and Singapore do not speak Indonesian. Malaysia should be English as 2nd language. Singapore could arguably be primary English speaking.
 * Africa has a number of issues.
 * What does the light grey denote?--(WT-en) Burmesedays 00:34, 15 December 2009 (EST)

 * really on the en wikivoyage, the propensity to speak English is the most useful fact to an English speaking traveller, i would have thought.   Holland, Scandinavia, etc - before going to learn another language which is a second language to the country anyway..  --(WT-en) inas 00:45, 15 December 2009 (EST)

 * The light grey presumably denotes nations where none of the colored languages are spoken. To add another issue, Icelandic is spoken in Iceland. If this map were used, I think it could only possibly be used for the Phrasebook International (which is currently nominated for deletion). Otherwise, the languages spoken in each country are covered in country articles along with whether or not English will be understood. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:53, 15 December 2009 (EST)

 * The basic idea is good, but the topic is complicated.

 * In Canada, French is the primary language for all of Quebec, much of Northern Ontario and parts of other provinces, but English is widely spoken in those areas as well. There's huge variation, though; in some areas (e.g. parts of Montreal), you're fine with just English, but in others (e.g. Northern Quebec) you're helpless without French.

 * Mandarin is useful almost anywhere in China, since it has been the lingua franca for centuries and the only language used in education, government and national media for 50-odd years. However, for Hong Kong & Macau, Cantonese is more important. Mandarin is also an official language in Singapore, but other Chinese dialects are more widely used.

 * In many places, language use has political overtones. Speaking Mandarin in Tibet or English in Quebec may irritate some people.

 * For travellers, the most important languages are what Phrasebook International calls regional languages. Quoting that "Learn some of a regional language. Russian for Central Asia, Arabic for the Middle East and North Africa, French for some parts of Africa, Spanish for Latin America. This may be easier than trying to learn the local languages and is more widely useful." I'd like to see a map that emphasizes those. (WT-en) Pashley 20:20, 15 December 2009 (EST)

 * This map looks like an attempt to do that, though. It just has a lot of errors. I mean, aside from the languages listed, there are not so many other "linguistic spheres". Some, like Korean or Japanese, could be listed, but they have no sphere of influence. You could make a case for Swahili, but English is understood by most people that speak it. I'm on the fence about the usefulness of any such map, although I would be surprised if the phrasebook international got very many hits anyway. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 22:39, 15 December 2009 (EST)

Here's an attempt to create something more useful for our purposes. I initially tried to have English on the map too, but deciding which countries to include was just impossible—I think a separate color coded map showing the percentage of people per country that you'll be able to reasonably communicate with in English would be much more useful. This one just looks at the top 7 (I think) languages in order of relevance for travelers, and shows for which countries the language should be useful. The most obvious weakness is that this map cannot show tiny countries.

Having a Talk article devoted to language and travel might be interesting. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:15, 16 December 2009 (EST)

 * Awesome map, but English surely is missing, at least for Canada, United States, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. German is tricky, but I think it at least should be listed for Germany, Austria and most of Switzerland. English will get you further in the Netherlands (though German is partially understood), and I'm not sure if either German, Russian or English should be the best language for East-Central Europe. Southeast and East Asia is complicated as well: I don't think English fits here, even though it's probably the best language for the area. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 07:07, 16 December 2009 (EST)

 * Yes, this map is much better. Is Persian worth adding? Farsi is the main language of Iran, Dari one of two in Afghanistan and they are mostly mutually intelligible. Tajik and I think some other Central Asian languages are related.

 * I think English would need its own map, broken up into a scale: UK/US/etc. where it is the primary language, areas like Quebec/India/Singapore/etc. where it is an official language & widely spoken but not the main daily language, places like Amsterdam and where you can generally get by with only English, places like Paris where it is harder, places like most of China where you can expect English only from 5-star hotel staff and the odd student. (WT-en) Pashley 08:10, 16 December 2009 (EST)

 * What about Hindustani? (Is that term still in use?) My understanding is that spoken Hindi and Urdu are, at least mostly, mutually intelligible. The written forms use different alphabets, Sanskrit-derived for Hindi and Arabic/Persian for Urdu. Does that qualify as a regional language for the subcontinent? (WT-en) Pashley 08:33, 16 December 2009 (EST)

 * My first thought was similar to Peter and Pashley's - a map to show the English speaker how they'll fare in the countries of the world. Perhaps grouped by percentage of English speakers, or by category eg "Almost universal",..."Typically only hotel reception staff". But going beyond that I think there would be merit in similar maps for other major world languages - then the traveller can get an idea of where their Spanish or Russian will get them by. (WT-en) Andyfarrell 10:35, 16 December 2009 (EST)

 * The problem with English is that it is a global language, useful almost everywhere, very often overlapping with the lingua francas we're trying to show above—the map quickly becomes a mess. I found a handy wikipedia:List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population, but it's quite incomplete, and consequently, so is this map.

 * I've added Persian, German, and Hindustani (I didn't realize Urdu and Hindi were so clearly mutually intelligible!), as you can see from the updated thumb above. I'm not terribly convinced a working knowledge of Farsi will go very far in Tajikistan, whereas Russian will get you everywhere you want to go. The other Central Asian languages are all Turkic. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:16, 17 December 2009 (EST)

 * This map is much better than the originally proposed map! One thing: It appears that Spanish is the language of northern Quebec on this map. Shouldn't it be French, as well? (this comment is about the regional language map) (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:27, 17 December 2009 (EST)

 * I have no idea why Quebec is frustrating Inkscape so, truly, it is a troublesome province. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:47, 17 December 2009 (EST)

 * I love the (potential of the) English map. As well as filling in the blank countries it could do with refining further region by region within countries, eg in Yucatan it seemed a lot more than 0-5% spoke some English. Perhaps we could do that by compiling traveller experiences in text form first. I like the idea of a general Talk article within travel topics, which could use this map plus some of the material from Phrasebook International which it could possibly replace, and be a general guide to coping with language when travelling. (WT-en) Andyfarrell 03:14, 17 December 2009 (EST)

 * The "Talk" article idea sounds like a good solution to the Phrasebook International problems discussed on the votes for deletion page. I agree that using countries as the primary unit makes certain parts seem as though they speak more or less English than they do, but it's also a lot more manageable than dividing every country by state/province/prefecture. If the map is accompanied by text, I think differences could be pointed out in the text. The map is just a general overview, so people considering travel to a certain region can go to that region's article to learn more specific information about it. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 03:39, 17 December 2009 (EST)

Austria should be fit with German on the map. Switzerland is a harder case, it's split between German, French and Italian: most of the country speaks German though. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 20:54, 22 December 2009 (EST)

I started a Talk article. (WT-en) Pashley 21:17, 22 December 2009 (EST)

Talk and the Talk section of articles
It seems to me that it would be a good idea to relate this topic to the Talk section that can be added to almost every Wikivoyage article. I see the possibility of also creating travel topics called See, Do, Eat, Drink, Sleep, etc. These topics would tally with the respective article sections and be a general guide to each of the subject sections.

While a good start has been made on the topic of Talk, the article, as it stands, is very English-centric. I can understand that a useful starting point for a Talk article is going to be about communicating in, or without, English. But I would challenge the implicit assumption that it should be about inglish exclusively. Perhaps the article is better titled Talk English, if it is to be about English exclusively. I think a general introduction about Talking with others who do not share your native language(s) is needed. - (WT-en) Huttite 20:37, 23 December 2009 (EST)

 * Since this article was only recently created, I think there is a lot of room to work within this article to provide further details about "Talk" with/in non-English languages. It needs more input in basically every field, so I imagine it will change a lot, if people start contributing. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:50, 23 December 2009 (EST)

 * What is there is very much a first cut, nearly all copied from the two things linked to above. It was not intended to be remarkably English-centric, though this is English WT so it mainly addresses English speakers. There are sections on topics unrelated to English — "regional languages" and "coping without a language"; both could be expanded.
 * I think a section on how to learn a language could be added. It likely needs something on alphabets, too. Is it useful to earn the Cyrillic alphabet to puzzle out signs, even if you speak little or no Russian? What about the Arabic, Hebrew, Tamil, .. alphabets? How can one cope with non-alphabetic systems like Chinese? There are probably things worth adding that haven't even occurred to me.
 * By all means, if you can improve it, plunge forward. (WT-en) Pashley 04:06, 24 December 2009 (EST)

 * I like the current focus (and title) as it is likely to be of most use to the native English speaker, and this is the English Wikivoyage. On the Spanish Wikivoyage version of the article (if one appeared) I'd expect to find the topic approached from the viewpoint of coping for a native Spanish speaker. (WT-en) Andyfarrell 01:49, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Re-order sections?
Current order is: * Using English * Regional languages * Language as a reason for travel * Coping without a language * Widely used expressions Would this be better? * Coping without a language * Regional languages * Language as a reason for travel * Using English * Widely used expressions Or some other order? What sections need to be added? Should more of the Phrasebook International text be brought here? (WT-en) Pashley 04:53, 24 December 2009 (EST)

word list
Just to be sure it was forgotten unintentionally: the word list (as (WT-en) saved here) does not have any serious value, right? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:08, 9 March 2010 (EST)

Serbo-Croatian?
Someone recently added this to the list of regional languages. I'm inclined to delete it as insufficiently important and not widespread enough. WP says < 50 million speakers, way below other languages we list, and as far as I know, it is not much spoken outside former Yugoslavia. Anyone else want to comment? (WT-en) Pashley 21:08, 4 September 2010 (EDT)

 * I agree with you. It doesn't seem to have the number of speakers or spread across nations to be considered a major regional language. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:04, 5 September 2010 (EDT)

Singapore Malay-speaking?
As Burmesedays said above, isn't Singapore primarily English- (or Singlish-) speaking? When I visited in 1976, very few of the people I met spoke Malay - actually, only members of the Malay minority seemed to speak much Malay at all, though I admit my visit was very short. Has Malay-speaking among non-Malays in Singapore actually increased since then? I doubt it, but I stand to be corrected. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:46, 25 July 2011 (EDT)

 * English (of a usually very peculiar variety :) ), Mandarin and various other Chinese dialects are the most widely heard languages in Singapore. However, Malay is an official state language, the national anthem is even sung in Malay (Majulah Singapura) and I think about 14% of the population is ethnically Malay. It is therefore probably appropriate to include Singapore amongst countries where Malay is spoken. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:26, 25 July 2011 (EDT)

Dutch/Afrikaans
I feel like we should probably add Dutch/Afrikaans on the map of world languages for these countries:

 * the Netherlands
 * Belgium
 * France (French Flanders)
 * Caribbean
 * Suriname
 * South Africa
 * Namibia
 * perhaps Indonesia

—The preceding comment was added by Ischa1 (talk • contribs)

 * Maybe, but not for Indonesia, as the country had to fight a brutal war of independence against the Dutch after World War II, so the few Indonesians who are old enough to remember it and are able to speak Dutch may prefer not to, and I seriously doubt there are so many other Indonesians who learned Dutch or used to live in the Netherlands that it's nearly as useful a language there as English, let alone Indonesian. I also think it's safe to assume that while Afrikaans is indeed useful in South Africa, there are many South Africans who won't want to speak it, for historical reasons. It's probably advisable in most cases to try English first there, I imagine. It may be less controversial in Namibia; I think I've read that that's true, though I don't know why it is. Also, Dutch won't go very far in the Caribbean except in a few places, notably including Curacao, Aruba, Bonaire, and St. Maarten. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Speaking English to non-native speakers
This blog post at Slate, about how to modify your English when speaking to a non-native speaker who may not have native proficiency is something we should consider at least emulating in the "Using English" section of this article, and perhaps even consider as a separate page. Put it this way: I have figured out most of the things in it, but I'd have been a lot happier if I'd been able to read them somewhere before I learned them. Daniel Case (talk) 07:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Good stuff & yes, worth covering here. We do already mention some of it.

 * It is worth noting also that in many interactions both people will be using a second language. Consider a Swede in Pakistan or the Philippines; English is likely to be the language used, but no-one involved will be a native speaker and probably none will be familiar with the other's accent. The same sort of thing is quite likely to sometimes occur for any of the Talk. Pashley (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

World map of English language speakers just not credible?
This chart seems wrong to me.

 * 1) I can't find any source for the data it is trying to represent
 * 2) It doesn't explain what data it is trying to represent. Is the the number of native English speakers per country, or just the percentage who know English? (I assume the latter, but who knows?)
 * 3) You will notice that Canada and Sweden have the same color. Does that mean at least 10% of Canadians do not speak English at all?

I would suggest deleting this as it doesn't make sense at all and probably just wrong. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I don't know. What percentage of Quebecois don't speak English? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * According to Canada - "Approximately 98 percent of Canadians speak English or French: 57.8 percent speak English only, 22.1 percent speak French only, and 17.4 percent speak both". That would infer that 75.2% of the Canadian population can speak English. (2006 census).
 * I find it a bit hard to believe that almost 25% of Canadian do not speak English, although perhaps the statistics only reflect those who speak fluently. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't believe that, either. I'm guessing that's the percentage of Canadians who are not native speakers of English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Well over 20% of Canadians have French as their native language, and there are rural areas of Quebec and parts of the cities where you do not hear English at all in the streets. There are also immigrant neighbourhoods like Chinatowns or the Greek Danforth area in Toronto where other languages are spoken. I have no trouble believing "at least 10% of Canadians do not speak English at all".

 * For the traveller who speaks only English, Amsterdam may be easier than Montreal. Pashley (talk) 07:50, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I found Montreal fully bilingual the last time I visited, but I still probably agree with you, even though I met 4 or 5 people in Amsterdam in a long weekend who spoke Dutch and no English. I think a lot of native English speakers would find the Amsterdam accent easier to understand than the Montreal accent, though I didn't have trouble with either (I also speak French, which helped me much more in Quebec City than in Montreal). Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * So to take this away from the Canadian example, is the map measuring the amount of people who speak English (to any usable level) against those who don't speak any English at all? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:11, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I think the map is more or less worthless as it stands now. We don't know what it measures and we don't know how it does that. If there were some explanation; e.g. percenttage of people with at least x years of high school English or native speakers. Or something like number of people with at least B1 English according to the common European framework... But I guess it is hard if not impossible to get credible data on that. Furthermore, the situation in tourist areas and bigger cities (a big part of what we cover on this wiki falls in either category) may be markedly different. The European Union however does a number of studies on foreign languages within its borders and there are some reasonably accurate maps coming out of that; most of them available on commons. For example the following ones

Maybe it would be a good idea to insert one of these maps (or all of them) in lieu of a better one with global coverage, which I don't see happening any time soon. Imho no information is better than badly researched information. And you can say about the EU what you want, but they aren't known for sloppy research... 141.30.210.129 12:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Previous contribution made by me Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Yes, the EU map would be a good replacement! It could then serve as a foundation for the specific data we are looking for. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

 * A map with credible data is of course good, but I think a map on Europe only (or only EU!) is not relevant for this article. I think we got the Canada bit explained. Are there other weird things making this map incredible? Contrary to Wikipedia we do not have to have it 100 % right. I think the world map gives a good hint on where you get along in English and were you must be prepared to get along in other ways – which is what such a map should do. No map can tell all the story, because you may go to the one resort dedicated to English speakers or travel in countryside where few went to school. --LPfi (talk) 10:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Well imho this map's coverage outside Europe is not all that good, and besides really duh-worthy facts (people in Australia and the USA speak English? Who'da thunk?) offers questionable "facts"... Where does this map get the information from that Kazakhstan speaks better English than Russia or China? Also imho the Europe map is better as above 50% and below "native" there is really not all that big a difference to the traveler. If you have to (on average) ask two people to find one who speaks English, that's good enough for me to not bother with a Dutch phrasebook for example. Also even in full resolution some smaller countries like Belize or Israel are hardly distinguishable specks on the map. Maybe we can produce our own map based on a blank world map, but than again I doubt there are credible numbers for anywhere but Europe and a handful of other countries, as most governments either don't care or have other problems than finding out who speaks English. And there are few international organizations I know about that gather this kind of data, which to a certain extent is highly subjective as "speaking" a language is not a black and white issue, but rather a continuum from barely to Shakespeare... Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Although the map does not have to be 100% correct (as it would have to be on Wikipedia), I would still content that it is comparing 'apples to oranges' statistics for almost all countries and therefore rather misleading.
 * At the very least we should label this map to say what level of English in each country we are trying to compare against each other (fluency? high school English? written? spoken? ) Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:40, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I concur with User:Andrewssi2. We shouldn't let the perfect be enemy of the good, but the map right now is worse than nothing (or as a first step the Europe map further up on this talk page) Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Italian minorities in Libya and Eritrea?
I'm not sure you'll have a lot of success with Italian in either of those places - I mean there are many citizens of those two states who speak at least one European language, but that is because they fled the country due to ongoing issues (Eritrea's ahem "government" as well the ahem "situation" in Libya), so it's unlikely you'll find them in those countries. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Interesting BBC article
Native English speakers are the world's worst communicators. As a native speaker who has been an ESL teacher, I think I'm better than that ("not all men"), but I have certainly seen much of what the article discusses.

Any comment from our contingent of non-native speakers? Can we improve this article using ideas from the BBC one? Pashley (talk) 15:58, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure English native speakers are unique among monolingual speakers. Perhaps it is just more glaring because there are a higher number of well-educated and even well-traveled monolingual anglophones than there are for practically any other language. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes. And I think the non-natives observed were a special group: people with significant experience of multicultural cooperation. I do not think an ESL student has any particular ability to adjust to other non-natives; as I said in another thread, adjusting is easier if you know several ways to say something. Perhaps native speakers just avoid learning how to adjust as they think they have nothing to learn. Maybe that is the point to try to get through to them. But adjusting your speech is the main point of the article as of now, so I think the BBC article at most prompts minor additions to our article. --LPfi (talk) 06:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

 * ESL students will "dumb down" their English necessarily because their vocabulary is limited. They are also less likely to talk rapidly, with non-standard dialects or employing idioms, metaphors and so on. Plus they will usually also remember what their first stumbling attempts at English were like. None of that is a given for monolingual speakers of any given language. Plus second language speakers usually have at least some idea of how grammar works. Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Anglophone?
Talk just acquired an old joke as a quote. It uses "anglophone" where I'd prefer "an English speaker". Other opinions?

I'm Canadian & anglophone, francophone and (in my view, horribly misused) Allophone (Canada) are the politically correct terms there. I've heard the joke before, but always either in Quebecois French with "maudit anglais" in the punch line or in English with "American". I do not think either would be appropriate here. Pashley (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

 * The reason I used "anglophone" is because otherwise a variant of "speak" would be used four times in not many words. I'm not sure what your issue with anglophone is, but don't mind if you change it.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Nations completely fluent in English as a second language
The Netherlands is always cited as a nation where everyone speaks English really well. Not true. In one long weekend in Amsterdam, I happened to run into like 5 people who couldn't speak English well. Several of them were immigrants from other countries, such as Surinam, and two of them were the housekeepers at our hotel, who also didn't speak any French, Italian or German (the other languages we could have used - I'm not counting Malay, which was very useful for communicating at an Indonesian restaurant but nowhere else in Amsterdam). I think we should temporize a bit when making such statements. I was so embarrassed not to have learned any Dutch because I relied on such statements that my girlfriend and I looked for teach-yourself-Dutch videos and listened to them in our hotel in Amsterdam, so we could learn at least a few expressions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I've never been to the Netherlands, so I can't comment on that. But in Iceland, virtually everyone I met could speak English. That said, if you follow this YouTube channel by an Icelandic YouTuber, you'll see that her parents do not speak or understand English. And there was once I was seated next to a Danish woman on a flight from Singapore to Australia, and she did not speak or understand English, but she was quite elderly, so that may explain why. So yeah, of course even countries known for their English proficiency (as a foreign language) will have people who don't speak English. The dog2 (talk) 21:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The folks I ran into in Amsterdam who had poor command of English ranged from a young (early 20s or so) counterman at a gelateria (his command of Italian was also poor) to the middle-aged women who were housekeepers at our hotel, so not all the Netherlanders who don't speak English are old. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I see. So how would you compare general English proficiency in the Netherlands with say, Malaysia, India or Hong Kong? The dog2 (talk) 04:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * In my experience, a lot of people in the Netherlands speak English well, more than in places like India, Singapore, Hong Kong or the Philippines. From what I've heard, that's true for the Nordic countries as well, but I have not visited those. Pashley (talk) 05:36, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * I think the keys are "immigrants" and "elderly people". Several European countries switched from German to English as most important foreign language after the world war – if the process was slow not only 80+ people will have grown up before. Another factor is whether ordinary people have learnt foreign languages at all. In Finland university attendance exploded in the 1960s and a compulsory foreign language was introduced in the school reform of the 1970s (and at that time we already had a lot of films and TV programmes in English, subtitled). This means that people younger than 55 all have a reasonably good grip of English – and people of that generation or younger will more or less assume anybody has. Still, immigrants from countries where not everybody speaks English will not know the language just by having immigrated here, and the courses for immigrants hardly see English as a priority. The situation may be similar in many European countries. In some countries English got its status only after the end of the cold war, and some have had problems recruiting good teachers, and in these mostly young people know English well.
 * In some countries, like the Netherlands, there are lots of immigrants in the service sector, which means general proficiency does not necessarily agree with what you see as a tourist.
 * –LPfi (talk) 09:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * The young counterman at the gelateria was Dutch. I think more people spoke English well in the Netherlands and Germany when I was there a few years ago than in Malaysia in 2003, but keep in mind that I'm fluent in spoken Malay when in practice and therefore had no need to speak with anyone in English there unless they preferred to do so. I haven't been to Hong Kong since 1987 but definitely don't think English fluency was quite as prevalent there as in Amsterdam. And English was definitely spoken more there than in India in 1977. However, I think more Singaporeans spoke English well in 1976 than people in Amsterdam in 2013, though those were both short visits (and also, we spoke with one Malay cabbie in Malay when we were in Singapore). I'm counting Singlish, though, since we had no trouble understanding it, whereas some other English-speakers who hadn't already spent time in Malaysia before visiting Singapore would have had more trouble understanding that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:57, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Since travellers are very likely to come into contact with those in the service industry who speak little or no English, I'm in favour of changing any wording as necessary. However, I am not entirely sure whether there's a specific text in mind or just a general desire to avoid sweeping statements of "everyone speaks English" across the wiki.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * It's true that in Northwestern and (Western) Central Europe not everyone understands English, but most do (to some extent) and you won't have problems finding someone speaking English. On the other hand, you certainly cannot take this for granted in e.g. Russia, Argentina, Uruguay and non-touristy parts of Spain. I have a feeling that the higher the number of speakers of the local language, the harder it's to get by in any other languages. Ypsilon (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Things would have changed in Singapore since the 1970s. Back then, you had schools with different media of instruction, so someone who went to an English-medium school would probably speak English well, while someone who went to a Chinese, Malay or Tamil-medium school would probably not speak English as well. And there were even two universities with two different media of instruction; the National University of Singapore taught in English, while Nanyang University taught in Chinese. And before World War II, school was a privilege only for rich boys, so girls and people from poorer families from that era would probably not have gone to school, and hence wouldn't know how to speak English. It has been compulsory to send your kids to school since independence, and all schools and universities became English-medium in the 1980s, so if you go to Singapore now, anybody born from the 1980s onwards should be able to have a conversation with you in English. And yeah, Singlish can be hard to understand because we incorporate words from other languages like Malay, Hokkien (Minnan/Taiwanese), Cantonese, Teochew and Tamil, but we learn standard British English in school, so people who finished university after the 1980s should be able to switch to standard English when talking to foriegners. The dog2 (talk) 16:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Well, my brief experience in Singapore in 1976 was that English was much more widely spoken than in any city we visited in Malaysia, and I don't remember us running into anyone on our brief visit there who didn't have command of at least basic English. Most people spoke English very well. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

 * I rewrote the paragraph. What do others think? Pashley (talk) 04:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I liked what you did and appreciate it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's good except for one small point; Finnish is not related to English, and Finland is a Nordic countries. I'm not sure how English proficiency in Finland compares to the other Nordic countries though; maybe LPfi or Jpatokal can comment on that? The dog2 (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd say English proficiency in Finland is on the same level as in the other Nordic countries, at least among generations who've grown up with easy access to English-language media and the Internet and have had the chance to interact with English-speaking people (native and second language speakers) every day online and in real life. Myself I haven't actually studied that much English at school - I studied German and the "other domestic language" ie. Finnish, then English on the 8th and 9th grade where I found it very hard to learn the Received Pronunciation which we were supposed to use.
 * On the other hand, for instance Baby boomers could choose to study English at school, but they would have comparatively few opportunities to actually use it. It's entirely possible that people in other Nordic countries back then had more chances to use English and therefore have a somewhat better command of it. Ypsilon (talk) 09:05, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes, more or less. Finnish is not an Indo-European language, and this often shows, while the Swedish speakers in Finland generally study English as first foreign, after the "other domestic" (while the Finns usually leave the "other domestic" till after English). Thus both groups have a handicap compared to other Nordic countries. Proficiency is still high, with not only "the educated class" speaking English well. Baby boomers were able to choose English, but they had a shorter compulsory school, and I suppose few not aiming at the bacalaureat chose studying it. So among them, it is mostly the educated class who know English. And while they might not have had the opportunities to practice it that we have had, and may feel awkward using the language, you'd still be able to communicate reasonable well with those who did study English. For my generation, while I haven't interacted regularly with English speaking people, and haven't watched television that much, one cannot avoid English. I might have a hard time understanding English spoken with an accent, or understanding colloquialisms, but speaking carefully there should not be any problems with communication, and really, to get directions for a sight or hotel, you'd have to stumble upon some odd exception to have problems (even most immigrants come from groups who know English reasonably well). –LPfi (talk) 12:07, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Ukraine
Must we have Ukraine as an example of countries where "anti-Russia sentiment is high, so speaking Russian to a local may be offensive."? Ukraine says:
 * For a large majority in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, Russian is their first language. In the capital, Kyiv, Russian is more commonly used than Ukrainian. The language is seldom used in Central and Western Ukraine.

You might want to be careful about how you use Russian in Ukraine, but as an example I think it is awkward. Better leave the discussion on subtleties to the country article. The Czech Republic is already there as an example, and to my understanding there are no such problems (but I haven't discussed Russian with Czechs).

–LPfi (talk) 18:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

 * Most of what I gather is from the news and from travel vlogs, but my understanding is that because of the Russian annexation of Crimea, and its support of the separatists in Donetsk and Lugansk (all of which have ethnic Russian majorities), anti-Russian sentiment is very high among the ethnic Ukrainians, though most ethnic Russians in Ukraine are still very much pro-Russia. I know that Ukraine has passed laws that criminalise the display of Soviet symbols, just as Poland and the Czech Republic have, similar to how Germany and Austria criminalise the display of Nazi symbols. For instance, referring to World War II as the "Great Patriotic War" (by which the war is referred to in Russia) is now a crime in Ukraine. The dog2 (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes. So if you say anti-Russian sentiments are high, you have to add that this is true only in parts of Ukraine. Too complicated to be a good example.> –LPfi (talk) 05:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

 * I agree, there's much better examples out there. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:14, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

 * OK, I'll leave you to edit it appropriately then if you know better. The dog2 (talk) 15:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Canada
User:The dog2 recently deleted some text about Inuktitut, I think correctly, with an edit summary:
 * My understanding is that most Inuit know how to speak English, even though Inuktitut may be their native language. But on the other hand, Quebecois are typically monolingual in French and do not know how to speak English. But if I'm wrong, could our Canadian editors please correct me.

Yes but, as with more-or-less everything one might say about language, it is more complicated than that. For one thing, there are several languages among the Inuit; Inuktitut is only the best-known. For another, many Inuit, especially in Northern Quebec, speak French but not English. Also, lots of Quebecois speak good English.

One Inuk (singular of Inuit) I know is fluent in English & Inuktitut, & speaks another Inuit language, French & Cree (I do not know how well). In her youth she worked as a translator & that was needed since many Inuit spoke only Inuktitut. However, she's in her 80s and I do not know the current situation. Pashley (talk) 03:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 * I did ask a similar question to a while back (see User talk:Ground Zero). While nearly everyone is bilingual, there's still a minority who don't speak English nor French. (although aren't all schools in Nunavut in only English and French?) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Yeah, of course there are exceptions. I know your prime minister Justin Trudeau is an example of a Francophone Quebecois who speaks English fluently. Speaking of which, I heard the new governor-general is fluent in Inuktitut, so it'd be interesting to see if she gives her Speech from the Throne in Inuktitut during the next State Opening of Parliament. The dog2 (talk) 04:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about schools in Nunavut, but I would be very surprised if they do not provide instruction in Inuktitut. As Nunavut official languages are Inuktitut, English and French, I think the only constraint on teaching in Inuktitut is getting qualified teachers who can speak it. I think that a lot of the teachers are from "the south". Ground Zero (talk) 08:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about now, but I did read this article, but that three years ago. In particular "But of the 43 schools across Nunavut, all the schools operate in English, except for one in Iqaluit: it operates in French ". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Here are two more articles: 1, 2. The picture that they paint is that there isn't enough Inuktitut instruction. "Right now, education in Inuktut is mostly only available up to Grade 4, with subject matter taught primarily in English and French after then." So I think it is incorrect to say that instruction is "in only English and French". Ground Zero (talk) 09:27, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting. But still I guess that means a traveller having to need to speak Inuktitut isn't really necessary (although there would still be the older generation who may not be able to speak fluent English). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Few travellers will go to Nunavut or other Inuit areas of Canada. As there are only 65,000 speakers of the language innthe country, a traveller's chances of meeting a unilingual Chinese-speaker or Hindi-speaker in Toronto or Vancouver are much greater. I don't think this article should go into this granular level of detail. Ground Zero (talk) 09:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The point we try to convey is that Even in majority English speaking countries there may be places where your English doesn't help you. This is probably never the case in metropolises, but in small villages off the beaten track. It is unusual to English to be the majority language where you find those places, while it might be co-official such as in some African countries, with some other non-English language the main lingua franca. Kenya might be a prime example. –LPfi (talk) 12:07, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's even the case in Australia as well (an example) as well as Papua New Guinea (although if you go off the beaten track in PNG, you may meet someone who has never seen a foreigner before) + a lot of Pacific Island countries except for New Zealand. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Spanish language varieties, French language varieties etc.
We have - and I love it - an exhaustive article on English language varieties. While of course English is the most popular (second) language and a lingua franca worldwide, what about educating tourists and travel(l)ers about varieties in French, Spanish, and maybe other languages they might encounter? In (rural) Latin America, you might not get far with either British or American English or any other variety of English, for example,... Aren't the varieties of Spanish (Spanish Spanish v. Latin American Spanish v. Mexican Spanish) or French (France French v. Quebéc French v. Afro-French?) as significant as the differences between the English language varieties? What do you think?

Even within Germany, no bigger than the state of Montana, we have dialects and varieties of German considered quite significant. For example, somebody who speaks a little German might not understand Sächsisch as spoken in rural Saxony or Schwäbisch as, for example, spoken in Allgäu. Heck, even I didn't know a few Saxonian words like addeln or bransen.

Another example: Few from outside Berlin would use Schrippe for what is in standard German called Brötchen - Baden-Württemberg etc. use Weckle/Weckla/Weckli and Bavaria Semme(r)l, while Rundstück is used around Hamburg,... Pm147-Sm152 (talk) 15:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

 * And if you include Austria and Switzerland, it will get even more colourful (or more complicated). In Austria - and nowhere else - some call a tomato Paradeiser as opposed to standard German Tomate. What most call Johannisbeeren are Ribiseln in Austria. There are several different terms for a carrot throughout Germany and Austria - Möhre, Mohrrübe, Karotte, Gelbe Rübe, Wurzel etc.
 * In Switzerland a sign can read Fehlbare werden verzeigt - a sentence not even understood by most Germans. It means that those who do whatever is banned on the sign will be angezeigt, i.e. reported to the police/authorities.
 * I don't know, however, how significant the differences between Spain's Spanish and Argentinan or Peruvian or Mexican Spanish are. Pm147-Sm152 (talk) 15:06, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we have different phrasebooks for some varieties of some languages, e.g. Brazilian Portuguese phrasebook or Lebanese Arabic phrasebook, and I see no reason why there can't be one or multiple phrasebooks for Spanish varieties (as long as they are different enough from each other to warrant separate phrasebooks). The reason for the existence of the English language varieties article is, I think, because you can't expect to have an English phrasebook in an English-language website. Vidimian (talk) 15:15, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we should expand at least for the most common(ly encountered) languages from a "phrasebook" article to a "X language varieties" article. Is it correct that Arabic is more like the family of Romance languages than a single language, but seen as a single language for (mainly) religious(?) reasons? Pm147-Sm152 (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't speak Arabic, but AFAIK, yes it's a continuum of varieties spoken from the Atlantic to the Gulf of Oman, but its modern standard is still actively spoken somewhere (Saudi Arabia), so its analogue in the Romance continuum would be more like Italy still speaking Latin, the other Romance speakers getting educated in Latin despite having vernaculars significantly drifted from it and being able to understand/speak it with varying fluency. I think there is also a nationalistic angle involved in considering Arabic a single language — not all Arabs are Muslims. Vidimian (talk) 16:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Another approach to the travel-relevant local words different from the standard variety is to note them in the "Talk" sections; for an example, see Austria. Vidimian (talk) 15:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Yes and we also have a Swiss-German phrasebook. We used to have separate ones for European Spanish and Latin American (now there's just one, with a short section mentioning there are differences). But let's just say if you're confident in your tourist-level Spain Spanish, talking out of my own experience, that confidence will be gone in a few minutes off the plane in Buenos Aires. There are also noticeable differences in smaller languages like Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian, though mostly related to pronunciation and mostly a thing in rural areas. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Oops! There are definitely differences in Norwegian. In Troms, I hardly notice they don't speak Swedish, while in Bergen, I am lost. And people from Helsinki commonly don't understand anything when confronted with the Närpes dialect. Norwegians are good at understanding dialects, as everybody there uses theirs, and in Närpes people will (try to) speak standard Swedish when somebody from southern Finland enters, but that doesn't change the fact that the dialects are different.
 * What matters, though, is whether or not the locals can adjust their speech such that the traveller can use their school German or their Hermod (or whatever app is used nowadays) Spanish to communicate with locals. If there are a few key differences, tell about them, if the differences are too big, warn and create the separate phrasebook.
 * –LPfi (talk) 16:24, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * And speaking of Spanish, there's no single "Latin American Spanish". There are many varieties of Spanish in Latin America than can differ quite substantially from each other. Argentinian Spanish, Mexican Spanish, Caribbean Spanish and so on all differ from each other significantly. And in say, Colombia, there are multiple varieties of Spanish, so someone from Bogota doesn't speak the same way as someone from Cartagena.

 * And with regard to Arabic, there's also slight differences between how Muslims and Christians speak Arabic. For instance, Muslims refer to Jesus as "Isa", while Arab Christians call him "Yasu". The dog2 (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

European soldiers
Hnishy63 added that "European soldiers are likely to speak some English, because it is the official language of NATO". To what extent is that true? Do soldiers get actual education in English, other than about military jargon? Of course, in the Nordic countries, some of which have conscription, English is widely known regardless, and for professional armies, a course could be part of the military training. But are they? Was the addition a guess, or do you know to what extent such courses are arranged? –LPfi (talk) 12:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 * My understanding is that even though English (and French) are official languages and used for documentation and cooperation at high levels, troops internally may use other languages, and only those involved in cooperation between units need to be proficient in English. I don't know at what level that would be. I don't think battalions are formed across countries other than in very special circumstances, and then involving specially trained personnel. Thus, only officers, communication personnel and members of special units would need to know English. –LPfi (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 * I don't know how it works in Europe, but in Singapore, our military conducts bilateral exercises with the Chinese military. Most of the Chinese soldiers don't speak English, and most of our Malay and Indian soldiers don't speak Mandarin, but they still participate in the exercise. We don't force our Malay and Indian senior officers to learn Mandarin, and most of the senior officers from China don't speak English, so I believe they have professional translators in the military for the senior officers so they can talk to each other. The dog2 (talk) 17:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I toned down the sentence a bit. It is based on my personal experiences about 30 years ago. It's only a general rule and NATO has considerably expanded since, probably diluting overall English proficiency among its members.--Hnishy63 (talk) 02:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What kind of experience was that? You probably did not meet a random sample of soldiers and a random sample of other people from the same countries (or whatever), and both selections may have been very biased. NATO expanding hardly affects the tendency of proficiency in individual countries, so your experience may still be valid, but I am not sure it was in the first place.
 * If it is, either NATO countries give courses as part of soldier training, soldiers de facto improve their English skills once recruited or people proficient in English are more likely to join the army. I don't believe in the latter two (other than for specific positions), while the former one should be checked.
 * I removed the sentence for the time being, as it was oddly placed (the bullet was about country-level proficiency) and too general (not all Europe is a NATO member – in Switzerland I assume the status affects few and in Russia only intelligence officers). And what about international marketing, diplomats, journalists & al? Granted, some work only in e.g. the Spanish-speaking world, but many benefit from knowing English.
 * –LPfi (talk) 09:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Even if accurate, I'm not sure it's relevant to this article. How often do tourists go around talking to European soldiers? I think it seems like somewhat niche advice for the general "Talk" article. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:44, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I assume you could notice a uniformed soldier on the bus or in a pub and ask for advice or just start chatting. That would of course mainly be soldiers off duty, those on duty should probably not be disturbed. However, I am not convinced that a sufficient share would be significantly more proficient than the random clerk or waiter for the tactic to be worthwhile – if they all really are, then I think it indeed should be mentioned. –LPfi (talk) 14:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * NATO has Bureau for International Language Co-ordination and encourages soldiers to raise their English proficiency; it helps them to get better-paid positions in peacetime. In wartime, quick communication is literally vital; you may well lose your life for insufficient language abilities. And diplomats and journalists are not identifiable by their outlook while soldiers are.--Hnishy63 (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I can believe that. For conscription armies, though, the time in service is too short for anybody to get radically better at their language (if it's 6 months for a private like in Finland, or something comparable – most time is needed for pure military training). For countries with little second language education, I assume many soldiers don't study English on their own, even when encouraged. We'd need statistics or good observations. On the "official": French is also an official language, do soldiers speak good French too? And on being vital: yes, when it comes to coordination, but the life of a private seldom depends on them being able to talk themselves with people from foreign units. –LPfi (talk) 09:17, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Loan words in English
Should this be covered under Talk or English language varieties? I think we should cover it somewhere because words that are borrowed into English often have a different meaning from in their original languages. For instance, we use "madrasah" in English to refer to Islamic religious schools, but the original Arabic word refers to any kind of school, so a Christian school will also be called a "madrasah" by an Arabic speaker. The dog2 (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * yeah, to me, madrasah, caffè and jamón are overwhelmingly obvious examples, not borderline obvious, but really plain in your face obvious. I'm sure you will take it as a personal attack, as proof that I have a personal grudge against you. But yes, they're as obvious as you can get, and this stuff would better be left to w:False cognate IMHO. Ibaman (talk) 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Obvious to you because you speak multiple languages. Not obvious to people who only speak English. An English speaker visiting Japan might ask for "manga" and by pointed to the Batman or Superman comics, not knowing that the word in Japanese refers to any kind of comics, not specifically Japanese comics. And those are not false cognates, they are true cognates but false friends. And when I found it confusing when I visited Spain before I realised that jamón is just the generic word for ham in Spanish. The dog2 (talk) 19:41, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * just to satisfy my curiosity, please tell us what were your thoughts about "jamón" before you realized it means "ham", what was your confusion. You should speak about "prosciutto" as well. Ibaman (talk) 19:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I thought it meant specifically Spanish dry-cured ham like jamón ibérico. And likewise, I thought prosciutto meant specifically Italian dry-cured ham, like prosciutto di San Daniele and prosciutto di Parma. If you say "jamón" or "prosciutto" when speaking English, those are what people will understand them to mean. An English speaker will not use "jamón" or "prosciutto" to refer to the regular ham from the supermarket that you put in your sandwich. The dog2 (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, that means you're PRESUMING that every "English speaker" is linguistically unaware of these subtleties, and must be thoroughly informed about the existence of false friends and shibboleths. Call me pedantic if you will, but to me, this is all too obvious to need mention in a travel guide. Other opinions will be welcome. I find so unconfortable when it seems we're engaged in a dialog that no one else cares about. Ibaman (talk) 20:10, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I can confirm that only caffè seemx obvious to me; the others don't. SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 20:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I made a mistake in the edit on caffè, but what I meant is the word "latte" in Italian just means milk, and is not a type of coffee like in English. If you go to Italy and ask for "latte", you will get a glass of milk. If you want the type of coffee we call "latte" in English, you have to say "caffè latte". The dog2 (talk) 20:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed – which is why I agree that your edits should be included. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 21:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

 * I think it is quite rare for such things to matter. e.g. I do not think either jamon or prosciutto needs an explanation of its meaning in the original language, though their English meanings might be mentioned in articles on the relevant cuisine.
 * Taking Chinese cuisine as an example, terms that are routinely used by English speakers like dim sum and mapo tofu should be mentioned (& checking the article, they are).
 * Beyond that, it is all judgement calls & there's a slippery slope to avoid. Having been an expat in China, I use jaozi, zi ran nui rou, gambien tudou (spicy french fries, the most popular dish among my circle) and other Chinese expressions, but I'm not sure if those belong in a travel guide. Pashley (talk) 20:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * What I'm thinking about is more about English speakers getting confused when they travel to those countries and see those terms on labels or restaurant menus. The dog2 (talk) 20:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

pardon me for getting itchy about "footnotes" and "references" that spoil the flavor of a travel guide. Ibaman (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * oh well, in the ITALIAN PHRASEBOOK it should be stated in no uncertain terms that LATTE means MILK, and this is the most accurate translation. As of this moment, with more than ten years as a wikiuser, I'm too accustomed to ttcf and WV:Tone,  and copyediting accordingly,

 * We might want to add a warning about this specific kind of false friends in Talk. It is very common to use a loan word for some specific version of something, like in these examples. I don't think we need to point that out were we actually tell the meaning of the word ("coffee: caffè" is quite clear without a nota bene, the word really means coffee). –LPfi (talk) 23:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

 * I don't think English language varieties would be the place to cover these, and some of them aren't really loan words. Jamón is Spanish, not English, as far as I'm concerned. And you probably know that madrassah means Islamic academy in languages like Malay. The place to deal with its meaning in Arabic is in Arabic phrasebooks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 * Yes, I know the meaning in Malay. The word for school in general is sekolah, while madrasah is specifically an Islamic religious school. And likewise in Singapore English, we use madrasah to refer only to Islamic religious schools. I just remember my Arab friends found it weird when I used it that way, because in Arabic, "madrasah" is just the generic word for "school", whether secular, Islamic, Christian or whatever. And what I was saying about jamón is that English speakers use it to refer specifically to dry-cured hams from Spain. But in Spanish, it is a generic word for any kind of ham, including the cheap ham from the supermarket that you put in your sandwich. The dog2 (talk) 01:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 * English speakers normally don't use the Spanish word for ham at all. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem, as I see it, is not in the phrasebooks, where the words are clearly defined. The problem is with words not in the phrasebooks (or when the traveller didn't look it up), such as ordering a latte presuming one knows what it's called, because one knows how to order it in Italian cafés in other countries. Likewise (or the other way round), if asking for "mail" in Finland, you could very well be directed to a computer instead of the post office. Thus, Talk is the right article for this. –LPfi (talk) 09:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * So let's say you know your friend is going to Spain on holiday. Wouldn't it be a normal thing to ask your friend to "please bring back some jamón for me"? Or couldn't someone say "I want to try the jamón" when they're going to a Spanish restaurant? The dog2 (talk) 14:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * No. And LPfi, the place to mention that latte means milk, other than the Italian phrasebook, is Italy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to put this kind of information in specific places. Nobody's going to read Talk on the off chance that it will happen to have information about the difference between ordering a caffè latte and a café au lait in the particular country and language that will be relevant.  They're far more likely to read the article about the country, the phrasebook for the language, or (if we have one) an article about the food in that country.
 * I'd never ask a friend to bring jamón back from Spain; first, it's almost certainly not legal for casual importation. Second, the word just means ham.  If I wanted jamón iberico, I'd ask for jamón iberico specifically. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:45, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, I guess that might be a difference between Singapore and American English then, since we don't get as much exposure to Spanish in Singapore. And unlike in the U.S., it is legal to bring jamón iberico into Singapore from Spain. The dog2 (talk) 19:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Dying languages
I'm not sure it is relevant to travel, but Disappearing tongues: the endangered language crisis is an interesting article. Pashley (talk) 13:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Talk


text:
Talk:Tallinn

Could anyone give me a range for budget, mid-range, and splurge prices at hotels? Thanks. -- (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 10:30, 30 June 2006 (EDT)

Deletion
Is there a reason (ie no longer in business or not a place to recommend) why the following was deleted? (WT-en) Maj 23:23, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

 * Vana Tom youth hostel, Vaike-Karja 1, +372 6313252 (fax: +372 6120611), . Very centrally situated in the Old Town, so can be a little noisy. Situated in the same building as a strip club. A breakfast of a ham/cheese baguette, egg, fruit juice and piece of fruit is included. Clean, comfortable dorms. 235 EEK for a triple-decker dorm bed.

Olympic ruins!? What ruins? At least by the looks just about everything that was built for the 1980 Olympics is still in usable condition, most of the facilities have been renovated...

bicycle
no mention to bicycle on transportation. Who can help?
 * added some information about cycling (WT-en) Helge123 04:52, 21 October 2009 (EDT)

New pictures?
The page tallinn.fotonet.ee allows usage of its pictures for promotion of Tallinn directed at tourists (http://tallinn.fotonet.ee/eng/front/terms_of_use). Could anyone update this page with pictures from tallinn.fotonet.ee? (WT-en) Helge123 17:24, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Nice! not sure it falls within our scope though, as anyone should be allowed to reuse wikivoyage content, not just websites or people promoting Tallinn. You could always contact them and see if they will allow you to reuse content under a free Creative Commons license. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 17:40, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

 * I spoke to the administrator of the picture bank and she told me that Wikivoyage can use the pictures if the authors are given credit. So everything should be OK? (WT-en) Helge123 04:28, 27 October 2009 (EDT)

Safety :))))))
Where from that information comes? Some idiot says and you trust him?

I live in Lasnamäe and walk with my dog every evening at 23:00 to 0:00, but haven't seen serious crime solvings since 1990's. Or you've seen druguser once or thief and after it you made this inference?

It is not reason to avoid real life cause government social politics and their way of "solving" social and poverty problems.

Also, I'm sure you can find thiefs even in Germany, Spain, China and other countries, so why you write like it is disaster? Or thiefs live only in Estonia?

Just be careful:
 * 1) wear your expensive camera under the clothes
 * 2) take small cash with you - 500-600 EEK is enough
 * 2.1) don't ever walk with cash 20000 EUR in your pocket, keep it on your card, which password is only known by you
 * 3) don't take gold or other jewellery, leave it in hotel during walking
 * 4) don't drink with unknown people
 * 5) if you have met thiefs, remember, nobody will come to help, so defend yourself by your hands and legs and make all actions correct and quick [Unsigned]

 * Hello. If you think anything in the article is inaccurate, please stop complaining and plunge forward and edit it yourself! Thanks. And in talk places, please sign your posts by typing 4 tildes (the "~" key) in a row. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 20:19, 29 June 2012 (EDT)

Student Travelers Tallinn
Deleted as it is under new management with a new name.

Walking tours and apartments
Isn't Wikivoyage's tour policy to delete ordinary walking tours, on the basis that an individual traveler could walk the same route on his/her own? I also refer you to this related discussion on a walking tour listing: It seems to me that, unless we revisit the tour policy, there should be no "Walking tours" subsection, and the only listing now there that should remain is the Secret Tunnels Tour, because those are probably hard to access without a tour guide. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 06:19, 23 June 2012 (EDT)

 * I agree, and I removed the tours per policy. Do we accept apartment listings in this article, there was no discussion to allow them. Jjtk (talk) 21:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

 * All the apartment owners should explain how their listings fit within the guidelines at apt and seek a consensus. Apartment.ee's listing is, in any case, incomplete, as it must include information about their office. TallinnApartment.info is problematic because their website seems to be only in Russian. The other two listings may be serviced apartments; that's what they seem like, based on what's in their websites. I'm tempted to delete the entire apartment section for now. Do you agree that's justified as a matter of policy? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but be helpful to them, us (and, therefore, the Traveller) by perhaps creating a new "Apartments" subheading with an HTML commented out section explaining clearly and exactly what information we need and in what style in order to have/retain a listing... -- A l i c e ✉ 01:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Having a blank "Apartments" subheading is a clear invitation for the same or other apartments to be listed without discussion, and it's been my experience that listers who are self-interested never - absolutely never - read commented-out sections. I think it would be fine to list serviced apartments, but the owners need to discuss their properties here and seek consensus, then follow the format shown at apt.Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The wiki way is to have a modicum of trust in casual editors. My experience of editing the Vietnam page on Wititravel, is that if you promptly remove the spammers content every time it's inserted, they give up after about 2 months - your mileage may vary. The important thing is to provide clear guidance by an HTML commented out section explaining clearly and exactly what information we need and in what style so that there is a carrot and stick effect. Good listings stay, bad ones are swiftly and consistently removed. That's the beauty of having a watch list with e-mailed notifications of changes. You may find that you even get some new interested editors by following the wiki principles... -- A l i c e ✉ 20:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that even having an "Apartments" section in a particular article requires a consensus, and no-one has requested a consensus. So are you, therefore, advancing the opinion that there should be a consensus to have an "Apartments" section in the Talinn guide, in particular? If so, please make the argument based on the criteria at apt. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I simply assumed that, since the criteria are very clear, someone knowledgeable about Talinn had already decided that Talinn was a location "where rental properties are a common form of travel accommodation" and all the requirements at apt were met. I assumed this because, on reading the history of this article, Jjtk seemed to have a long term interest in maintaining this article and had already done good work in both alphabetising and winnowing the list. I assumed that if s/he did not think the requirements were met s/he would have plunged forward and deleted all the apartment listings as per policy rather than edited them. I am not qualified to opine on whether the criteria are met or not. Certainly from the prices and other details displayed in the current listings, and a quick search of the web, apartments seem to be a viable option for a traveller wanting to spend 2 weeks or more in Talinn. The fact that there has been no discussion or no bid to remove them in a long while could, in itself, be a sign of consensus or equally it could just be a sign that this article has been neglected over a long period of time. However, if we take Apt at face value, then since there has been no discussion, the listings should be removed... -- A l i c e ✉ 00:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Your opinion, Jjtk or others? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that it is enough to mention that rental apartments exist. A single line in the beginning of the Sleep section would suffice. I am a bit familiar with Tallinn, and I live here from time to time. Most apartments are semi-official or even completely private. They do not have a business address and do not conform to our requirements. Additionally, they are subject to changes: every apartment may be rented for 2-3 months in a row and, thus, remain unavailable for short-term visitors. Finally, Tallinn has plenty of cheap hotels and hostels, so we can simply avoid dubious listings of rental apartments. --Alexander (talk) 07:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. Jjtk (talk) 08:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I added a sentence. Do you think it's helpful or mostly an invitation to repost apartment listings? Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Let's see! --Alexander (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thanks for helping. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Kroon
Please would someone update the prices given in kroon to euros (eg: Patarei (Battery) Prison) ? -- A l i c e ✉ 23:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Remaining tasks
I'd like to nominate Tallinn for a DotM feature, but I feel like it's important for it to have a map and a useful "Climate" section first. Also, I just converted a bunch of legacy footnote-style external links to front links (I think that's what the current style is called), but I undoubtedly missed some. Is there anything else that needs to be done? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Climate
This is some climate data I extracted from WP, we might use it in the climate section. Any other source for data? I'll try to find the day lengths at least. Danapit (talk) 08:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The day lengths are from climatemps.com. Danapit (talk) 09:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It needs at least a dynamic map. I'm "almost a local" so maybe I should take a more thorough look at the article, unfortunately I'll be very busy for the next few weeks. Danapit, did you plan to put the length of the day into the weather box? I can't remember seeing anything else than max and min temp and precipitation in WV's weather boxes. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, actually the template enables quite a few parameters. I find day length is quite useful. The problem is where you get the data for monthly snowfall and water temperature from? Danapit (talk) 09:36, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * No rush, Ypsilon, since we probably won't want to run this article until the weather gets warm again after the winter, in any case. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:01, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Geo and unnecessary stuff
I have now added geocodings to all listings. For the embassies the green boxes beside next to the flags look a little bit "too much". The apartment listings that were discussed earlier and that are currently hidden... I would throw them in the trash can per Apt. And then we have the hairdressers in the "Cope" section. Yes, it's not uncommon for Finns to use services like hairdressing, beauty salons, opticians, dentists etc. in Tallinn because they are comparatively affordable (and "everyone and their dog" goes there for shopping, partying or on a mini holiday at least 2-3 times/year anyways - a bit like Tijuana). But for visitors from further away I don't think they're that relevant. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

DotM?
I definitely don't have the energy to create the nomination right now, but the article seems very good. If any of you feel it's ready for a nomination, I'd be likely to support it. But I may have missed something. Is there anything that still needs to be done before this article is ready? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd say the article is in a pretty good shape now and I can write that DotM entry. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:08, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Old town picture
Mates, the main picture from the old town Tallinn is a good one but imho it doesn't reflect the center as it is green around but not in the center. Any opposition to change to jan (talk) 10:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

 * Your picture does indeed give a better view over Vana linn. Of course the weather could be better, but I'd say let's add your picture anyway. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

ϒpsilon, would should happen with Tallinn? I think it either should be deleted because the names of the universities don't help or we enter some Eesti courses. What you prefer? jan (talk) 16:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

 * It would be best to have something useful to put in the section, short courses in Estonian language/culture etc. I would be surprised if there wouldn't be any such courses in Tallinn (arranged by the university maybe?).
 * Otherwise the section would of course have to be deleted. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Old House
I recently added a listing for Old House Hostel at Uus 26. There seems to already be a listing for Old House at Uus 22, but it's about apartments, not hostel rooms. I was unable to find anything at Uus 22 on the Old House website. Their apartments seem to be located at Rataskaevu 16, on the opposite side of the Old Town. I have been only once to Old House, in the hostel at Uus 26, two and a half years ago. What is the situation here? Do they have premises at Uus 22 or not? Should the listings be merged? JIP (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Uus 22 is indeed not mentioned at their homepage at all... nor at booking dot com, tripadvisor, hotels dot com or anywhere else. All of them say it's at Uus 26, so it's pretty safe to believe that's the correct number and remove the other one. It may well be that the hostel has been at #22 several years ago and they've now moved. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:07, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Parallel discussion from the pub
Apologies if this is in the wrong place.

I recently added a listing for Old House Hostel in Tallinn at Uus 26. There seems to already be a listing for Old House at Uus 22, but it's about apartments, not hostel rooms. I was unable to find anything at Uus 22 on the Old House website. Their apartments seem to be located at Rataskaevu 16, on the opposite side of the Old Town. I have been only once to Old House, in the hostel at Uus 26, two and a half years ago. What is the situation here? Do they have premises at Uus 22 or not? Should the listings be merged? JIP (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Hi JIP! If there is no 1-day accommodation at Uus 22, then the listing at Uus 22 should be deleted. Could you please do it? Thanks for caring! Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * That's too strict a standard. Surely, a place with a week's minimum stay would serve many visitors, and in fact, Apt has the following standard:

 * Apartments or cabins must be available for rentals of one week or less Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Already fixed per Talk:Tallinn. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Maiasmokk
Where to list Maiasmokk in the article Tallinn at? It's a café and a confectionery shop. The article Tallinn only lists famous sights, stores, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, and hotels. I don't Maiasmokk falls into any of these categories. JIP (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wycsi. Cafés are listed in either Drink (if there's a separate Café section, which Tallinn does not have and it's unnecessary to make a heading for just one place) or Eat. While I don't know this establishment, I would probably list it in Eat (likely under Budget, as it's a café?). On the other hand if it is more of a shop than a café, list the place in Buy. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've added it to Eat/Budget. JIP (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Districtify
In Russian Wikivoyage, Tallinn is districtified. Would that be something worth considering here as well? With 33 See, 12 Do (some don't have coordinates yet), 19 Buy, 30 Eat, 21 Drink, and 38 Sleep listings, there's no need to districtify Tallinn yet but we're getting there.

However, they've divided the city into seven districts which I feel is too much. If Tallinn is districtified I'd go with something like this:

 * 1. Old town: within the walls.
 * 2. Central Tallinn: Kesklinn minus the old town, maybe not the whole administrative Kesklinn but just as far as the airport or even closer to the old town? It could also include the Kalamaja district; overall places reasonably close to the port where most visitors arrive anyways – like a horseshoe encircling the old town with the open end pointing southwest. Not sure if Kadriorg should be added here or in the eastern part.
 * 3. East: Eastern part, ie. Lasnamäe, Pirita, outermost parts of administrative Kesklinn east of Lake Ülemiste.
 * 4. West: The rest, ie. Põhja-Tallinn minus Kalamaja, Haabersti, Kristiine, Mustamäe, Nõmme, west of the lake.

--Ypsilon (talk) 11:21, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

 * And Italian WV into even more districts than Russian WV, plus the division doesn't correspond to the one used in ru-WV. So there's no need to copy them (we'd end up with many short articles), but I'd rather say that the division I suggested above would work well for us. --Ypsilon (talk) 07:50, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

 * I dont know. Looking at the markers the concentration is pretty much in one district, so all we would achieve is, to reduce the listing maybe by 10% for one district and have a couple of stub district. Tallin is really packed, IMHO, and most sights could be reached by foot when I was there.
 * Maybe a better approach would be to clear the listings a little, especially to cut back on ordinary restaurants and accommodations in general. I think WV is in too much competition over this information with G, TripA, and BooKing anyhow.
 * Cheers Ceever (talk) 14:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

 * It's true that the old town is the number one attraction of Tallinn by far (and this will almost automatically mean a considerable share of Tallinn's listings are there), though it's actually quite common that one or two (central) district(s) have half of a city's listings. Nevertheless I'm not too much of a fan of deleting listings for places that are open. Perhaps best to leave the article as it is, then. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Viru Hotel from Tammsaare park.jpg

 * Not visible in the article, but Actually it is, right in the beginning of Sleep, how did I miss it? this Soviet-era "skyscraper" is probably the most iconic hotel in the city so we may want to have a pic of it (uploaded locally?). --Ypsilon (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Sure, if you'd like to use it in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Addition for the Understand section
I propose to add a subsection and two links to it

Virtual visit

 * Digital.Tallinn - a city guide offering an interactive 360° Virtual Tour of Tallinn
 * CityCam - 24/7 livestream to Old Town in 4K quality

 * Virtual visits are not about travel but about virtually travelling while staying home, so please don't add them and read External links. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Tallinn Hotel Viru.jpg

Banner
Given that has used the current banner on Tenet tour, here's an alternative I cropped. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 11:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Banner 1 is much better. I would consider to find a new banner for Tenet, in any case. /Yvwv (talk) 12:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with Yvwv. Ground Zero (talk) 12:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree, the new Banner 1 is much better. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 20:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I reused banner 0 for Tallinn history tour. /Yvwv (talk) 22:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Tallinn


text:
Talk:Talpiot

When you say "neighborhood", is this a district or it's own city/town? Should this be part of the Jerusalem guide? (WT-en) Maj 13:53, 23 January 2007 (EST)

 * Yes, it should be merged in. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:38, 23 January 2007 (EST)

 * Anyone have thoughts on this, not Jerusalem seems to be districitified? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 19:35, 23 December 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Talpiot


text:
Talk:Talwel

vfd discussion

 * Delete. I can find few results that note this is an actual place, which leads me to believe the place is too small to become a valid destination guide.  Wikipedia displays no results for Talwel nor does Getty's Thesaurus of Geographic Names .  Google has few results for a village by this name. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 02:52, 19 September 2006 (EDT)

 * If there's only one possible place, keep & redirect.
 * Keep. If it doesn't warrant an article, redirect to Jalgaon (district) ~ 203.144.143.5 09:42, 19 September 2006 (EDT)

 * Redirect to Jalgaon (district) — (WT-en) Ravikiran 10:15, 19 September 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Jalgaon (district). -- (WT-en) Ryan 17:23, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Talwel


text:
Talk:Tama

(WT-en) Emiko asked "This is crazy. Why do they have so many same restaurants? Can anybody answer this question?" I moved this out of the main travel page, but it is an unsolved mystery of Tama. (WT-en) Ted

title: Talk:Tama


text:
Talk:Tamale

how many people actually get food poisoning from eating street food? i ate street food all the time and never had any problems. i think that entry should be deleted.

Clean up
There is no point in listing the name of a hotel is you don't provide any information about it, such as address, map coordinates, or phone number. I have remove some "name-only" listings. The Google maps reference code (a bunch of letters and numbers) isn't a useful navigation system, so I've removed that. In the Tamale article, we assume that all listinfs are in Tamale, unless stated otherwise, so we don't include "Tamale, Ghana" in every address. Ground Zero (talk) 02:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tamale


text:
Talk:Taman Negara

Contributor link: to research this article try: - (WT-en) Huttite 07:04, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)
 * http://www.taman-negara.com
 * http://www.cuti.com.my/Sub/Pahang/guide_tmnegara.htm

-- Does the section about what not to talk during a trip in Taman really deserve to be on this page? - (WT-en) Pradyot

Not necessary to have it on this page. In any case these taboos apply to any jungle, not just Taman Negara (WT-en) Greenmango 04:53, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Redundancy
Taman Negara means "National Park." How about if we retitle this article "Taman Negara (National Park)"? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:02, 7 February 2011 (EST)
 * That idea has a certain amount of sense to it, currently the title is a bit like saying Jalan raya highway. To Malaysians it seems it is just the national part. The park was established in Malaysia in 1938/1939 as the King George V National Park and was only renamed to Taman Negara after independence. The Wikipedia article is the same as here Taman Negara National Park. It should probably be changed there as well. If we have consensus here I will then seek to change it there as well so at least they are both the same. For non-malay speakers it is no doubt of little issue however to anyone who understands or normally speaks in a malay based language it could seem a bit odd. I would support the name change put forward by (WT-en) Ikan Kekek. (WT-en) felix 07:11, 8 February 2011 (EST)
 * Somewhere along the line, the Wikipedia article was renamed "Taman Negara." I propose that we rename this, too. I will solicit comments in Requests for comment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess it is a bit silly, so yes, let's rename it. In text there might be instances when it makes more sense to use Taman Negara National Park, because a random reader will not know the meaning, but for the article title Taman Negara should be just fine. JuliasTravels (talk) 18:33, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree this article should be renamed to just Taman Negara. I suppose something could be added to the understand section of the article indicating that Taman Negara means National Park in Malay. Winter.daniel92 (talk) 07:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It would be very easy to do that: Taman Negara (Malay for National Park) is [blah, blah, blah]. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * In view of this discussion, the name change has been made. I made some relevant changes to the text, but it's always helpful for more eyes to proofread the text for consistency and clarity. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Name in English
Just wondering, is this park called Taman Negara or National Park when talking in English? I'm curious to know, just because I'm wondering whether this park should be mentioned in the hatnote placed in Mount Field National Park regarding the National Park redirect. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:43, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Usually, I think people just call it Taman Negara, but it literally translates to "National Park". The dog2 (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

 * I think every Malaysian would call it Taman Negara while speaking English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks for the quick response. Should it then be mentioned in the hatnote for Mount Field National Park? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:36, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It doesn't hurt to leave the hatnote as is; I'd just suggest a period at the end of it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. This makes me wonder whether we should turn the National Park redirect into a disambiguation page. The issue is that Mt. Field is the only article where we have coverage of a place called "National Park" and all the others are former names, names in a different language or English translations. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:59, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Taman Negara


text:
Talk:Tam Coc

VFD discussion
Content was copyvio from here. Destination is a cave complex. Perhaps a redirect would be better? Otherwise delete. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 04:08, 8 January 2008 (EST)

 * I've just created Ninh Binh so that I could redirect it to there, which I've now done (but I've not removed the tag). ~ 203.144.143.4 04:17, 8 January 2008 (EST)

 * My only objection is that Ninh Binh makes no reference to Tam Coc. A line about Tam Coc (a cave complex?) would be nice.--(WT-en) Wandering 13:39, 8 January 2008 (EST)

 * "Tam Coc - a nearby cave complex" added to Ninh Binh per WT:WYCSI ~ 203.144.143.4 15:25, 8 January 2008 (EST)

outcome: kept ~ 203.144.143.4 17:42, 20 January 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Tam Coc