text:
Talk:Spokane

Why is it unsafe to display gay/lesbian affection? i live in spokane and have never seen anyone attacked for their orientation in public, i am not gay so i may not be correct, but is that needed on this page?(WT-en) SpokaneWilly 20:04, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

 * Do you routinely see PDAs that go unremarked?  If not, you don't really know how Spokaners would react. That said, I think Spokane is not remarkably different than the rest of the USA on this issue, so no special warning should be added. -- (WT-en) Colin 18:33, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

This is my first day on wikivoyage, so what is a pda? and it is spokanite not spokaner.(WT-en) SpokaneWilly 20:05, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

 * It's not Wikivoyage jargon; it just means "public display of affection." --(WT-en) Evan 20:51, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

For what it's worth coming from a well traveled native-born Spokanite, while being more "conservative" (in the best sense of the word, if that's possible, sans any puritan connotations) that the west side (i.e., west of the Cascades), Spokane is no different actually than the majority of the country with respect to "PDA" regardless of orientation. PDA in general is completely inappropriate and distasteful, but we were all young once too. You may hear someone yell "get a room", but that's about as far as it goes. One difference of this region, is that while places like California like to pride themselves and brag themselves up on being "laid back" and "open minded", you'll be hard pressed to find a more easy-going and open minded region in the nation (and elsewhere) than the PNW because of our unique history (that very few appreciate or are even aware of in many cases). This is by and large a VERY tolerant region. When you hear of problems, more often than not it was brought here by people that brought their mindset here from elsewhere (noting that there has been a huge influx of people from TX, CA, the midwest and southeast in recent years, more than doubling the population of the PNW/IE - "Inland Empire").

Sleep
Should there really be a list of the major hotel chains in spokane? I think that should be removed and replaced by the local hotels.(WT-en) SpokaneWilly 20:36, 9 July 2006 (EDT)

 * We want both, and the big chains are easy. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:38, 9 July 2006 (EDT)

Why, i think that it is ugly and not needed. If people are smart enough to travel they are smart enough to know that there will be plenty of national chains in Spokane, the sleep section should be focused on the hotels that are unique to spokane or have significance to the city. And i also believe that the work on the pages should be left to people who know about the city, not people with editing bots. (WT-en) William M 21:52, 24 July 2006 (EDT)

 * As a community, we do not have a "focus on unique or locally significant hotel policy." If you think that's an error, then go to Project:Accommodation listings and propose a change to the current policy. If you can get a sitewide policy change, then we can implement it here. Until then, being a chain does not count against a hotel listing.

 * And I don't use an editing bot. Those are my changes and I take responsibility for them. We don't have a "locals decide" policy.  Again, I'm not dismissing your idea out-of-hand, just saying it's a community process and we follow site policies rather than individual per-article preferences. So if you think the current policy is old and busted, then propose a new one.

 * Do see the Project:Avoid negative reviews policy. If you have a particular reason to recommend against one of the chains (a reason like "drug dealers like this hotel", "windows don't lock", etc.), just remove it and provide a reason here so we can all understand it.  -- (WT-en) Colin 22:20, 24 July 2006 (EDT)

Define the "Palouse region"
I know this isnt regular Wikipedia where things are expected to be sourced, but still, I would like a reputable source (not Wikipedia-user generated: I dont know who made this picture- Washington (state) or what it was based upon) that explicitly defines the Palouse region before we lump Spokane into the region. According to the maker of that image, it seems the Palouse is bounded by the Spokane River to the north. But, from my research on the Spokane, Washington Wikipedia article, I was under the impression that the Palouse region ends south of Spokane. Im not a Washington native, but I go to school at Washington State University and i've never heard of this factoid.

What I do know is that Spokane is in a transition area -an area that is heavily forested, and at the foothills of the Rocky Mountains. Spokane is certainly near the Palouse region...but that alone doesnt make it OK to characterize it as part of the region. Geographically I think the Spokane is markedly different, there are more trees and is more mountainous. I would say judging by the below definitions that the Palouse begins around Spangle, Washington, south of Spokane and I think Boise, Idaho is more part of the Palouse than is Spokane (it is North of the Snake River as well, but I dont believe it is considered part of the region also, despite its similar topography.

the National Wrather Service on Spokane: "The city is located on a plateau where the long, gradual slope from the Columbia River meets the sharp rise of the Rocky Mountain ranges. This is a transition area between the desert-like Columbia Basin of central Washington and the forested mountains of north Idaho and northeast Washington...." SOURCE: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/otx/spokane.php

"'palouse'

Main Entry:

Pronunciation: \pə-ˈlüs\ Function: geographical name

1 river about 140 miles (225 kilometers) NW Idaho & SE Washington flowing W & S into Snake River

2 fertile hilly region E Washington & NW Idaho N of Snake & Clearwater rivers..." SOURCE: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/palouse

I just want to get the facts straight whatever they may be, and I think there is plenty of doubt about this undefined and unsourced (non-Wikipedia) fact.

134.121.247.116 03:03, 13 January 2009 (EST)

 * You might have better luck asking this at Talk:Washington (state). If I recall right, the regions for Washington State were completely reorganized and it may be the Palouse is just a rough holdover from the prior organization. -- (WT-en) Colin 03:06, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Heres another source that verifies the fact that the Palouse region begins South of Spokane.

Excerpt from The "Climate of Washington", Source: Western Regional Climate Center: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/WASHINGTON.htm :

"NORTHEASTERN – The northeastern and higher elevations of the Okanogan highlands, the Selkirk Mountains, and the lower elevations southward to the vicinity of the Spokane River are included in the northeastern area. Ranges of mountains in this section of the State are separated by narrow north-south valleys. The elevation increases from 2,000 feet in the valleys to 6,000 feet along the higher ridges.  Most of the temperature and precipitation records are from stations located in the valleys.  The average annual precipitation increases in a northeasterly direction from 17 inches in the Spokane area to 28 inches in the northeastern corner of the State. ... PALOUSE-BLUE MOUNTAINS – This area includes counties along the eastern border of the State south from Spokane to the Oregon border and west to near Walla Walla.  The elevation increases from 1,000 feet in the vicinity of Walla Walla to 3,500 feet in the Palouse Hills and to 6,000 feet in the Blue Mountains. Precipitation increases as the elevation increases in an easterly direction across this area. Annual precipitation is between 10 to 20 inches over most of the agricultural section increasing to 40 inches or more in the higher elevations of the Blue Mountains. The average winter season snowfall varies from 20 to 40 inches. Snow can be expected in November and to remain on the ground from periods ranging from a few days to two months between the first of December and march. Snowfall and the depth on the ground increase along the slopes of the mountains..."

Even if this data didnt exist, and all we had to go off of was that user-created picture (which shows the "Palouse" region as South of the Spokane river, I think we should still not include Spokane in that region because the majority of Spokane is north of the river.

In sum, the Spokane area represents a transition area between desert-like Central and South-eastern Washington and the Rocky Mountain foothills. I still think we should change the intro... 134.121.247.116 18:38, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Featured article?
This article nominally has Guide status. What does it need to be nominated at Dotm? /Yvwv (talk) 17:04, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The Eat Drink and Sleep listings haven't been updated since 2016. A lot of businesses closed during the pandemic, so someone using this guide would find many of the listed businesses closed permanently. Why would we feature such an article? Ground Zero (talk) 17:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I did not suggest it for nomination. I asked what the article lacks to be nominate it. /Yvwv (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And I identified something that it needs before it can be featured. Although it would be obvious, I think, from looking at the article and reading the dates of the listings. Ground Zero (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Spokane


text:
Talk:Springfield (Illinois)

Stay safe section
This article about Springfield, Illinois is ludicrous. The comments about crime have created a lot of humor in the local paper. The metropolitan area of Springfield is close to 170,000 ... I have no idea where the 600,000 figure came from. This is based on the Forbes article a few years back, which is the result of a statistical anomaly. Nobody is afraid to walk around in Springfield. This is a joke, and you really need to verify your information on these sites if you are to have any credibility at all! —The preceding comment was added by 98.222.3.49 (talk • contribs)

 * Edit the darn "Stay Safe" section! But do so in a way that's actually helpful to travelers. You need to provide useful information, not just complain that locals don't believe the place is unsafe. Poke around the site and look at other cities' "Stay Safe" sections. For example, New York City has a low crime rate nowadays, but the "Stay Safe" section is not blank. And please sign your posts on talk pages by typing 4 tildes (the "~" key) in a row, so that we know who's talking. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 12:11, 4 May 2012 (EDT)

This is the most insane piece of garbage I have ever read. Civic journalism? Yeah, right! More like incorrect reporting and blatant slander. While there is danger in every city -- including Springfield!-- the "stay safe" section is incorrect and disrespectful. You should be ashamed of your inability to verify facts, if nothing else. That being said, go to Springfield! Try a horseshoe! Visit Lincoln sites! You're just a safe there as anywhere else. —The preceding comment was added by 165.134.208.160 (talk • contribs)

 * The article that appears to have generated the above criticism is . Apparently neither the author of that article nor those commenting above noticed the "Edit" link next to the "Stay safe" section, which they (and anyone else) are welcome to use to fix any inaccuracies.  To those commenting: please be aware that, like Wikipedia, anyone can edit this site, and it is expected that if you see something that is incorrect that YOU will fix it by editing the article - simply complaining is likely to be mostly ignored. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:11, 4 May 2012 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Springfield (Illinois)


text:
Talk:Spring Green

Removed
I didn't see any tour information on their website, so it's not a valid travel destination. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:20, 14 December 2008 (EST)

 * Spring green will soon be home to the Furthermore Beer Company. The founders of Furthermore Beer Aran and Chris both live in the Spring Green Area and have recently Purchased a barn on the edge of town which they intend to transform into a brewery. So while your in town be sure to stop and have a peek at the new furthermore site!

Couldn't find any references to this place online. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:58, 14 December 2008 (EST)

 * An elegant little shop that features quality flatware, french press coffee presses, kitchen linens, wines, and many other wonderful things!

title: Talk:Spring Green


text:
Talk:Springwood

Multiple Springwoods
There are two Springwoods in Australia - one in the Blue Mountains in NSW and one somewhere in Queensland. There seems to be some confusion between the two - this page refers to the NSW Springwood but has an accommodation listing for the Queensland Springwood. I'm changing this to a disambiguation and moving the content into two separate articles, Springwood (New South Wales) and Springwood (Queensland). (WT-en) Fipe 23:51, 13 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Springwood


text:
Talk:Sri Lanka

For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Sri Lanka/CIA World Factbook 2002 import.

Cities
Please note that according to wikivoyage policy, there should be a maximum of 9 of the cities of most interest to travelers listed on a page. Other, less important places, should be listed under their regional sections. Thanks. (WT-en) WindHorse 20 Feb 06

Department Stores
I have deleted the details of ODEL department store, as it sounded more like an advertisement of the same. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 203.99.197.2 (talk • contribs)

summary in South Asia
What is the most descriptive summary we can give for Sri Lanka in South Asia article? Right now it's

> Sri Lanka - pearl of the Orient

and it says nothing about the place, not to mention it's boring.

How does the country stands out among its neighbors? What is the main thing making it different and unique? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 13:54, 8 January 2008 (EST)

I just saw this, when you google 'pearl of the orient', Manila, Hong Kong, and Singapore show up, but never Sri Lanka! I'm going to remove that epithet. Sgroey (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

 * FWIW, it's quite advertised that locally on paper, probably because of how Sri Lanka is shaped. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 09:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

what applies to Sri Lanka from India article
As Sri Lanka have some history of connection with India, I thought it is important to know what from India article can be applied to Sri Lanka as well.

I am not very knowledgeable on both, so this is an amateur hypothesis of what in India looks to be applicable to Sri Lanka:
 * in Get in:
 * Culture shock infobox
 * Customs and immigration
 * in Get around:
 * By plane : Check in (?)
 * in By train:
 * Classes (?)
 * Ticketing (?)
 * Meals
 * Other tips
 * Get around:By bus (except details of operators)
 * Get around:By car (except details of specific roads)
 * Get around:By motorcycle
 * By auto-rickshaw
 * Addresses
 * in Buy:
 * India
 * India
 * India
 * in Eat:
 * India
 * India
 * whole India
 * whole India
 * whole India
 * whole India (except Pakistan in Politics)
 * in Contact:
 * India
 * India

Please correct me where I'm wrong.

The reason for this is to have a reliable source of info we can easily copyedit from. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 16:12, 14 January 2008 (EST)

Towns
Wikivoyage does not have a "towns" section: we list only major cities and major points of interest. Please move these to the appropriate region articles. (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:55, 9 February 2009 (EST)

 * Bandarawela
 * Badulla
 * Beregala
 * Dambulla
 * Ella
 * Gampaha
 * Matale
 * Matara
 * Kegalla
 * Kaluthara
 * Monaragala
 * Puttalama
 * Tangalle

but it should never be a surprise without permission.
?

Northern (Sri Lanka) vs Northern Sri Lanka
In order to avoid the annoying parenthesis, can we change the directions to either Northern Sri Lanka, Southern Sri Lanka, etc.? If not, I would then prefer to use Northern Province or even Northern Province (Sri Lanka) to use the official names and make our divisions seem less arbitrary. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 16:57, 6 July 2011 (EDT)

Regions
Currently the region list based on official administrative areas but to a travellers point of view, 9 sub-regions are too much. I would suggest to reduce to maximum 5. Probably South, North, West, East and Central. I've travelled to Sri Lanka many times and this region-list would make sense. Any objection? --Saqib (talk) 19:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The current region list seems fine to me as it easily covers World Heritage Sites such as Kandy, Anuradhapura, Polonnaruwa, Sigiriya, Dambulla, Nuwara Eliya and Galle, and tourist attractive places such as Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Jaffna & Ampara. Otherwise, highlighting important/top 10 or 12 places would be ideal.--AntanO (talk) 14:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that what about decreasing currently 9 sub-regions to maximum 5. --Saqib (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It would ideal if there is similar map, which could indicate the region while mentioning the administrative areas. --Anton ·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠· 17:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not Wikipedia and we usually breakdown the regions which are best to a travellers point of view. Our defined regions are based on the convenience and expectations of travellers. Looking from a traveller point of view, the 9 official provinces of Sri Lanka not make good sense. --Saqib (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You're right in saying that we approach the division into regions according to what works best for the traveller, Saqib. Do these provinces have a long history? Do most people in Sri Lanka know the existing provincial boundaries? Are the boundaries well marked on the ground? Do the visitor information facilities use the existing provincial boundaries? Do the existing provincial boundaries follow geographical features or cultural divisions? --118.93nzp (talk) 06:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As far I know. No! --Saqib (talk) 09:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the provincial boundaries go back 180 years or so. I think I'll leave it to some Sri Lankans to explain the rest of it to you... --118.93nzp (talk) 10:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I misunderstood. Yes, even though most of the provinces were created long before but for a traveller, these 9 provinces are not very useful. Obviously a Sri Lankan traveller will know the boundaries of their provinces but a non-Sri Lankan traveller will not. I've travelled many times to Sri Lanka and and recently last year in August, frankly speaking these provinces were not useful for me. Other than that, 9 sub-regions are too much for a country such a small in size as Sri Lanka. --Saqib (talk) 11:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I think we can agree Saqib's idea. --Anton ·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠· 08:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Anton. I think I should plunge forward and merge the the articles as proposed above soon. Btw, your suggestions and comments for improvement of Travel photography article will still be very appreciated. --Saqib (talk) 12:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Hard choice, they both seem fairly good. I slightly prefer the first as it's a little more epic and awe-inspiring. James A ▪ talk 12:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * The first one. I'd flip it horizontally though if it is not a major landmark. PrinceGloria (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Both are beautiful. I'd favor keeping the current banner, but I would like for the source image of the new banner to also be used in this or another appropriate article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * I like the new one better. The smudge on the right side of the current banner is not pretty. Danapit (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * The photographic quality of the proposed one is certainly better, but I prefer the original as a destination banner --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * I don't think it's a smudge, just an overexposure, and in this case, I think it arguably is an artistic effect. I don't find it ugly, in any case. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Proposed Syced (talk) 07:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Bombings
Multiple co-ordinated attacks, several at Catholic churches: Over 100 dead, 500 injured. CNN NY Times. Do we need a warining? Pashley (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, we've usually mentioned major terrorist attacks in a warning box in the Stay safe section. -- ϒψιλον (talk ) 10:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Time formatting
Which is most common in the Philippines: the 12-hour clock (e.g., noon-2PM and 6PM-midnight), or the 24-hour clock (e.g., 12:00-14:00 and 18:00-00:00)? Thanks, Ground Zero (talk) 12:21, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm not quite sure... But in Sri Lanka, the 12-hour clock is more common.  Arep   Ticous                                                    16:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oops! I meant Sri Lanka! Sorry about that. I had copied some words from the Philippines talk page and forgot to change the country. Thanks, though. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 16:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Sinhala language version of this page
I wonder what steps we need to follow to get the Sinhala language page https://si.wikivoyage.org/wiki/ශ්‍රී_ලංකාව that corresponds Sinhala version of this page. Any pointers are highly appreciated --NandanaM (talk) 16:16, 24 July 2019 (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) 09:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Shri-lanka3.jpg

 * It's a photo of a currency, so I don't think we're allowed to have this one. Thankfully, this deletion nomination was opened in March 31 so it's likely that this won't be closed anytime soon. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:39, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

 * What do you mean "not allowed"? It's not fair use to have images of currency on this site? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure to be honest. Would defer to you and . SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think we can. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Over here, and probably elsewhere, the central banks try to have control over images of banknotes, being afraid of forgeries. Mostly this is totally irrational: anybody can take a photo of a banknote, having it at Commons helps little (scaling the Commons copy is more difficult than getting a good photocopy), and often the legal restrictions are non-copyright restrictions, which might not apply at Commons. To close "loopholes" they often are very vague about what legislation they have as basis for their claims on reproduction being subject to their conditions. This means anybody will need to do their own research, unless the legal situation is described at Commons. –LPfi (talk) 11:23, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In this case there seems to be simple copyright as reason for deletion, and I think there is nothing unclear about that. Commons isn't very interested about non-copyright restrictions, which might stop us from using the image. Check the rules on the central bank website, and if they seem to allow us using it, as fair use or otherwise, then no problem, otherwise research is needed. LPfi (talk) 11:27, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting that there's a copyright problem with the photo itself? The nomination for deletion was on the basis laid out here:

 * 'The government works that are excepted from copyright are only "any official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, as well as any official translation thereof" (Intellectual Property Act, No. 36 of 2003, at Section 8B), so it is assumed that banknotes and coins are protected and not appropriate for Commons.'

 * "It is assumed" is probably good reasoning for Commons, where the photos are by themselves, but why do we want to engage in negative assumptions about what we can use in context? I would suggest to you that if the government of Sri Lanka has a problem with a picture of currency on a Wikivoyage article, they could post a request to remove it. I doubt they would. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * The problem with currency is that there often are non-copyright restrictions on such images. Commons has no interest in them as the banknotes are non-free because of copyright (I assume). We can use the file under fair use provisions of US law, but that is no defence in front of a Sri Lankan court. We can ignore the risk, either assuming that the use is legal also there or that nobody will get sued anyway (although I don't think counterfeit charges are of the cease and desist nature), or do some research to make sure there is no legal risk. –LPfi (talk) 21:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * I see. OK, so we'll have to just let the photo be deleted, unless someone else does that research, because I don't have the time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It has been deleted now, and I've just removed the photo. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Arrival card
Should we mention that the arrival card can be filled online, after the ETA section? https://eservices.immigration.gov.lk/emb/eEmbarkation/'#/home-page --SRChiP

 * Go ahead. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sri Lanka


text:
Talk:Srinagar

Safety in Kashmir
In September 2005, there is no war going on and i think it hasn't for some time. There is no need to be a fearful tourist just a careful one. The place should be considerably safer than Bali or London as there is no global terrorism problem there.

Locals told me that the Pakistani government does not currently support the separatist militants. Tourists are not the target of any violence, the Indian military are. There are a great many military in Srinagar. Just don't hang around them as it is their centres were recent bombings have taken place. The bombings are fairly small and kill a handful of people in each incident.

Advertising
I'm tempted to remove Bloomingdale or whatever it's called from Sleep section too as it's obviously shameless (and common) Indian advertising... but I'll leave that up to someone else... BTW, they had themselves listed 3 times in this tiny article including an infobox! I may be headed up to Srinagar in a week or so, if so then I'll update this article - it needs some TLC! (WT-en) Cacahuate 09:40, 2 November 2006 (EST)

 * If suggestions are advertsing.........I am afraid that no one can suggest or write anything about any place may it be an attraction ,place of interest or place to stay, as KASHMIR has been in news and some nice and great experience makes you feel like mentioning the name of place one stayed and enjoyed(BLOOMING DALE)..........thats why I mentioned this place.I still feel like mentioning the same unless it violates the rules of wikivoyage. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 59.94.186.145 (talk • contribs)

 * No, you added it because you own it or at least work there... please see Project:Don't tout. You are allowed to edit here, just like anyone else, but we just ask that you do it in a neutral tone. You may also want to check out Project:Welcome, business owners – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 00:18, 20 April 2008 (EDT)

Paradise On Earth
Kashmir was really paradise during seventies.Influx of Tourist brought some respite to the cash starved populas.Major educated lot exploited the poor/illeterate.Governement of India pampered the public with lots perks In 1970 to 1984 one kilogram of wheat floor was 44 paise and one kilogram of Rice 46 paise in fair price shops.Politicians like rulers used the sheepish public to grind their axe .Those who want to escape the tropical heat in summer sought respite in Kashmir. Due to denudification of forest the weather has drastically changed .The constant 28 degree celecius temperature in summber now hovers around 35 degree making it uncomfortable in srinagar city.So escape to sonamarg/yusmarg/gulmarg/phalagam. Best part of yatra amarnath is enjoyable.Worth a try. especially youth who prefer two wheeler to next street buddy will stretch their legs and exercise the hill climbing. Talk some rest and enjoy the nature at its best. U can literally distinguish the 4 seasons sprint summer autumn and winter. People are good but if u speak Hindi/urudu/English u will be fleeced in commerce bargain the lingo of market.warichoo waare are the good words.Beware of people swearing on kuran and taang. GOOD place to visit do not forget to visit kheer bhawani

rozabal pic
srinagar has a heritage and geniune heritage buildings need to be put by preference on the tourists attraction list and rozabal has no tourist or local significance except some polatical propoganda being hyped by the locals to attract torists... so the pic needs to be removed

 * In fact Rozabal has been mentioned by some German author(book.Christ in Kashmir)the locals have nothing to do whatsoevr with the hype or anything else.To say that the locals have hyped  its significance for tourist attraction is TOTALLY BIASED A and UNBASED ....people should study  first and than write something.Even Pooliticians have never mentioned Rozabal in anyway....(normally politicians touch everything and anything for thier own interests).

 * But yes locals go this place and have faith in this place as Kashmir has been the valley of Sufis and sailnts people have a sense of respect.It may not be out of place to mention here that NOT MANY tourists visit this place so the contributor/writer (who writes pic should be removed) should know the facts.

 * Who decides what is a "genuine heritage" building? Regardless of what you believe to be true or not about Rozabal, it has gained some attention, and some people want to visit it. I did, for one. It's a key location in a fairly popular book. So, what's the problem? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 00:31, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Floods?
New Yorker story reporting major flooding, a "humanitarian crisis". Do we need a warning? Pashley (talk) 02:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Srinagar


text:
Talk:St Andrews

Any local media? What is the municipal government?

Merge
This article needs to be merged with St. Andrews, Scotland. I thought that the other article was a copy-and-paste from this one, but they're quite different. --(WT-en) Evan 20:26, 14 December 2006 (EST)

 * See also St. Andrews. Heh. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:28, 14 December 2006 (EST)

 * You scared me -- I was worried we had three articles on the same subject. --(WT-en) Evan 20:32, 14 December 2006 (EST)

 * Content from the other one (St. Andrews, Scotland)is now merged into here. vfd or redirect to here? (WT-en) WTDuck2 15:34, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

Removed do listing
I removed this listing, since I couldn't see how this would be relevant. Feel free to add it back if you think otherwise. dom (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Peat Inn
I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to have a full Peat Inn listing in 'Eat'. On the website it describes itself as a restaurant with rooms, the focus is clearly on food, and it has a Michelin star. It could either be listed twice (in 'Eat' and 'Sleep' - my preference, because then you can get full details of both services), or do the reverse of the current setup (main listing in 'Eat', referred to in 'Sleep'.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Including the listing in both sections of the article seems like a good idea. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 10:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:St Andrews


text:
Talk:St Andrews (disambiguation)

VFD Discussion
There are three pages. St. Andrew's, St. Andrews, and St Andrews. The first two are for the same Canadian city. The last is for the home of golf in Scotland.
 * Merge, rename, and redirect. The home of golf is vastly better known, so it should keep the name. The two Canadian pages should be merged and renamed St Andrews (New Bruswick). I created a disambig page pointing to the current names. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 19:10, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

Result: Redirected. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:26, 7 October 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:St Andrews (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:St. Andrews, Scotland

The content that was here as of today has been merged into St_Andrews. Proposing this page for deletion/redirect. (WT-en) WTDuck2 15:35, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:St. Andrews, Scotland


text:
Talk:Staniel Cay

==Moved from the main page on 12 Nov 2010

North America: United States: Staniel Cay, Exumas, Bahamas

Staniel Cay, Bahamas is part of the famous Exuma islands, stretching 100 miles southeast of Nassau. It is less than a mile square and it is the home to about eighty full-time residents. It is protected by the Bahamas National Trust so it is required for tourist to stop by the main entrance of the island and not go off exploring on their own, unless they have been staying on the island. There are many different beaches to be enjoyed on the island, “rule” is: If someone’s on a beach, go to the next one!.

Summary
Welcome to Staniel Cay! 2009

Licensing
Accommodation Staniel Cay, is also known for its famous Staniel Cay Yacht Club which has been part of this island since 1956. Staniel Cay, consists of 9 cottages which are all built to accommodate tourists by offering a clearer view of its wonderful water, as well as a front view of the beautiful sunset. It also offers an eighteen-slip marina, a three thousand foot airstrip and its restaurant and island bar have been named by Jimmy Buffet as one of the “Ten Great Places for a Waterside Drink”.

If staying at one of the cottages there is a Package plan that might come in handy when choosing a place to stay, The Package Plan includes lodging, three meals per day per person, one soft drink or one juice per meal per person, all taxes and gratuities, thirteen inch Boston whaler (includes fuel), bike, snorkeling gear, ocean kayak, and round-trip Staniel Cay airport transfers. It does NOT include: airfare, bar charges, internet access fees, between-meal snacks/drinks, appetizers, guides, or golf carts.as mentioned before there are nine cottages travelers can choose from. There is the blue, pink, orange, lavender, yellow, keylime, oceanblue, periwinkle, and the coral cottage. All which are perfect for newlyweds, or families.

All cottages include appliances such as air conditioning, a coffeemaker and a refrigerator inside. However, they do not provide any cooking facilities. The cottages do not have individual telephones or television, but phone, fax, TV and internet service are available at the club house, located in the Yacht Club. Smoking is not permitted inside the cottages. Pets are also not permitted, unless staying at a privately owned cottage.

Staniel Cays marine also offers a renovated marina, fuel, electricity, fresh water, ice, bait and a dock to accommodate boats and yachts.

Although Staniel Cay is small, it has the basic needs a tourist might need. It has a church, library, post office, three small retail stores and marine supply store.

Staniel Cay also has an All Age School where natives attend school everyday.

Summary
Staniel Cay All age school. 2009

Licensing
Staniel Cay also holds church services during the week and a sunday service which is very popular among natives, who religiously attend.

Dining Staniel Cay offers its tourist with the best dinning around. Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner is served in the yacht club everyday, a combination of Bahamian and Continental Cuisine. It also offers a bar! Located inside of the yacht club, great service and a great time to meet people and enjoy every second on the island.

Activities Staniel Cay offers a variety of activities for everyone. Besides its different beaches, the island offers scuba diving, snorkeling, kayaking, boating, fishing, golf carts and more. Since the island is very small, it is very easy to get around whether is by foot or by golf cart which can be rented right on the island.

Staniel Cay its known for its hospitality, great food and the Thunderball Grotto. The Thunderball Grotto is one of the most outstanding snorkeling attractions in the Bahamas. It is also known for being the locations of movies such as Thunderball, Never Say Never Again and Splash. Many tourists enjoy the Thunderball Grotto for its “natural fishbowl” once the tide is low, many get to experience the beautiful corals and amazing sea life.

Staniel Cay’s mainly focus is to make sure every person that visit’s the island leaves wanting to stay much longer. When it comes to recreation and activities all water activities are encouraged. Whalers, snorkeling, and kayaks rides are always on a “weather permitting” basis. Unfortunately, once equipment has been rented, no refunds are given due to weather conditions.

The cottage rates as well as the prices of foods and drinks is quite reasonable. However, there are many things that need to be overlooked before coming to Staniel Cay. For example, aside from the room rates specific extra charges are applied. A 6% Bahamas Out Island Promotion Board levy is charges as well as ten percent Ministry of Tourism Hotel Tax or 5% housekeeping gratuity.

When not on the island, boating trips to Pig Island as well as Lizard island are offered or travelers are able to rent boats and go explore on their own. Both islands are located adjacent to Staniel Cay. The left over food from the restaurants at Staniel Cay is saved and used to feed the pigs at Pig Island.

Summary
Warm welcoming from the pigs at Pig Island

Summary
Lizard Island is well known for its spectacular creatures 2009

Licensing
Staniel Cay is protected by Bahamas National Trust, it is prohibited to touch, hurt, or eat any creatures or other wild life.

Getting to Staniel Cay Staniel Cay has a three thousand foot long airstrip, which allows the island to provide transportation from the airport to the island and from the island to the Nassau airport.

Summary
Private Plane available to and from Staniel Cay. Owned by a Staniel Cay native. 2009

Licensing
Staniel Cay has done a wonderful job in the ways they have treated their visitors. They are well known for their hospitality and their effort to make everyone feel at home. Many people like coming back to Staniel Cay because it is a place where they can relax, be on the beach alone, complete peacefulness, the perfect paradise.

No Pets are allowed in any of the nine cottages. Some housing is provided by Local villagers as well as private owners

Staniel Cay Bahamas is a beautiful island, filled with many activities which can be enjoyed by individuals of all ages. You won't regret your visit! It is a place you must experience!

Summary
Staniel Cay colorful cottages

Summary
Beautiful sunset from the Thunderball restaurant in Staniel Cay, Bahamas

title: Talk:Staniel Cay


text:
Talk:Stanley (Falkland Islands)

How and why is this at guide status?
Is this supposed to say: There is not much more to say about this place? Or can/should I go ahead and demote to "usable"? Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It was promoted in November 2006 (Special:Diff/1374943/1374944) when the status criteria were significantly different than they are now. At the time it covered every hotel and restaurant in the town, but things have probably changed since then.  If you feel it is no longer a guide then go ahead and demote it. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:26, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This is just a small town, so I do not think there are tens of POIs we've forgot to list. That said, if the article was up to date nine years ago very likely many things have closed, opened or moved.
 * By googling up the information in the article, this could actually make a nice OtBP in the Southern Hemisphere summer (ie. in about a year). ϒpsilon (talk) 12:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Primary topic?
I'm inclined to ask, why is Stanley, FK, not clearly more famous Stanley? It's the capital of the Falkland Islands and all the other Stanleys seem to be about tiny, insignificant, minuscule towns. Should this be moved to plain-old Stanley? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 10:26, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Stanley (Falkland Islands)


text:
Talk:St. Anthony

I do not agree with the suggestion that this article be merged into something called "Minneapolis/North". I never heard of anyone in the Twin Cities refer to such an area. The Wikitrvel criteria suggests that articles not be written for "tiny towns". St Anthony has about 9,000 people. Is that defined as tiny. If so, there is a lot of editing that needs to be done in Wikivoyage. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Kilgoretrout (talk • contribs) 02:49, 16 July 2007

 * Actually, this does look like a good candidate to be merged into a Minneapolis district, or perhaps to another location, if you can think of a better one. The principal rule of thumb at Wikivoyage for deciding what gets its own article is whether you can sleep there. Since this article describes the town as having no accommodations for travelers, it would appear that it does not meet this basic criteria. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:06, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

 * St Anthony isn't even adjacent to North Minneapolis, it's next to Northeast. It doesn't belong in the Minneapolis article or any of its subarticles, since it is not part of the city proper. At any rate, I don't see much noteworthy information in the article to begin with, and anything important could be included in the article for the Twin Cities region as a whole, which is where suburban info goes if the suburb isn't worthy of its own article.(WT-en) Eco84 19:00, 28 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Yeah, if you were to merge it, for sure not North. Northeast would make more sense. 129.244.136.183 20:38, 19 September 2008 (EDT)

 * St. Anthony is the northwesternmost point on the island of Newfoundland. In Cod We Trust. K7L (talk) 02:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Anthony


text:
Talk:St. Anton

This article is far too vague, full of POV and written in a very annoying, patronising, verbose style. And the english is simply appalling. In short, it's rubbish. I mean who was the author trying to fool?

Is is worth keeping any of this or should we delete it and start from scratch? votes? 137.222.40.132 09:55, 18 May 2005 (EDT)

I think this is copied from a tourist office brochure, which explains the POV and the flannel...

title: Talk:St. Anton


text:
Talk:Staraya Russa

Star nomination discussion
This is a really neat OtBP literary destination in between St Petersburg and Moscow—the little summer getaway for the Dostoevsky family, where Mssr Fyodor Mikhailovich wrote The Brothers Karamazov. Our guide, based on the Russian version + a ton of research I just did (takes 4x as long to find stuff on the ru-net, whew!), is over three times the length of any others I can find, with much more exhaustive coverage of the city. This would be our first Russian star article, although I have another one in my back pocket! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:54, 17 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Support. Really sweet little article with PF's usual stamp of quality written all over it.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:28, 17 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Support. Fantastic stuff - colorfully descriptive, but also pragmatic and honest. Scanning the article I can't find anything off, with the exception that I'm not sure if the Balneological Resort listing should have hours or not (if you say no then I'll take your word for it). But other than that, looks perfect! (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 02:20, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Nitpick of course, but have we decided to allow datestamps to listings "valid as of year ...."? I mean hotel price for Hotel Polist: "1600 rubles (2009)". --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 05:41, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Almost. A few comments below, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 11:28, 19 June 2011 (EDT)
 * sanitoriae: should it be sanatoriums?, which I would expect to be the most common English form
 * map: See and Do no 7 and 9 should break in the same way
 * times: should be 12-hour format and no decimals if not required
 * See and Do: I do not like the combination of see and do into one section, it makes it more difficult to understand which activities the town offers. Further, I thought our standard headings were mandatory

 * Sanitoria, actually!
 * I am not sure I understand?
 * While somewhat controversial, it had once seemed that we had something approaching a consensus to allow the 24 hour format for regions in which it is used (and in Russia it is used categorically), and thereby follow the changes made to the spelling policy. As such, we have already starred articles with the 24 hour format.
 * We have already come to an agreement (by rock paper scissors!) on this already, and have starred multiple articles (e.g., Walt Disney World/Hollywood Studios, Washington, D.C./Anacostia, etc.) with the same or similar headings. In this article, the reason is simple enough: there are no activity listings to add. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:35, 19 June 2011 (EDT)
 * On the map, I think what Claus means is that in the legend you have:
 * Monastery of the
 * Transfiguration
 * and then you also have:
 * Museum of the
 * Northwest Front
 * (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 22:26, 19 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Ok.
 * Yey, as PerryPlanet explained
 * It is a mess to have different ways to show hours in different countries. I read the discussion, and clearly no consensus was reached, and our policy was therefore not changed. Yes, we have a starred article using the 24 hour format (which ought to be changed), but we have several starred articles outside US using the 12 hour format. However, this is details to be discussed elsewhere.  The important thing here is that the article is in non-compliance with a clear policy, and in my opinion this is not acceptable for a star article
 * I read the discussion and see that it was agreed to allow a combination of the sections for Walt Disney World/Hollywood Studios, which I guess makes sense for this very special article. However, no consensus was reached to allow combinations of sections in general, and our policy was not changed.  If the combination is acceptable for Staraya Russa, I guess it will be for most of articles for smaller places.  I find it strange to name a section See and Do, when it does not include any activities.  Further, why do we want to hide for the reader that no activities exist?  But again, this is details to be discussed elsewhere.  The article is in non-compliance with a clear policy, and in my opinion this is not acceptable for a star article, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 00:03, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

 * The article is not "in non-compliance with a clear policy" regarding the combination of article headers. That discussion did not pertain only to WDW, and such combinations are used in numerous articles when it makes sense to do so. We clearly had a consensus to allow such headers, your assertion to the contrary has no basis. Anyway, I will simply slush this. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:34, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

 * As the slushing was a bit hasty, I'm restoring this. Our Star requirements specifically say "It follows the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule."  That means we can award the star to articles that do not match the MOS exactly if we have a good reason to allow deviations.  In my opinion, the unresolved nature of certain style standard details ought not derail an otherwise outstanding article from being starred.  (WT-en) LtPowers 22:01, 21 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Great to see the article back here. Hope it will end up with a star.  However, I think the article could be improved by changing the two areas where it is not in compliance with our policies.  It is correct that deviations from MoS is acceptable if some specific reasons make that needed, but I do not see that being outside US and being small are sufficiently exceptional to warrant a deviation.  I think we are moving in the wrong direction if any discussion of possible change of policy should imply that both the existing and the proposed changed policy are equally acceptable for star articles.  I think that until a new policy has been discussed and approved in the relevant talk page (which is not here) and the policy is changed, the existing policy should be applied to, unless the destination is so special that a deviation is needed (which is not the case here).  The discussion of whether the present weaknesses of the article is sufficient to hold it back from getting the star can easily be avoided by simply improving the article as suggested, and I am really struggling to see why such improvements should not be made, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 09:50, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Are you suggesting a blank Do section? If not, what would you like to see listed there?  (WT-en) LtPowers 12:22, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * I'll change the international standard back to AM/PM if it makes others happy, although I think the grounds for this objection are very weak. For a full year in the linked discussion, there were plenty voices of support for a policy change, and only one voice against. Sheki was starred under those circumstances.

 * The argument that a combined "See and Do" header is "in non-compliance with a clear policy" is so obviously baseless that I feel fully comfortable ignoring it and proceeding with the starring process. I would, though, like to understand why you think this is a clear policy, where you have read this, and why you think both practice and consensus would not determine our procedures. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:09, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * A combined See and Do section is fine with me. This sometimes works well in some small city articles, and more often so in park articles.
 * On time format, until there is a definite consensus (it seems close) on allowing use of either format, then I believe Star articles should all follow the established AM/PM format. Given the attention that is given to format issues with Stars, I am very surprised to learn that there is a existing precedent using a 24 hour time format.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 20:49, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * I've reread the "See and Do" debate (which I was a part of), and it reads like a consensus to allow it now just as I felt it was then. If it is a matter of adding some clause to the policy that states, "In special circumstances in which a location has only "See" or "Do" attractions, a combined "See and Do" section may be used." then let's just slap it on there so that this nomination can move forward. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:04, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * That's fine, and we should also mention the infrequently useful "Eat and Drink" combination if we do. Although I'm not sure we really need to, as our policy articles and our common practices already disavow an inflexible one-size-fits-all approach. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:29, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * LtPowers, if I had written this article, I would in the do section have mentioned that not many activities exist here and then put in a couple of suggested walking tours. I agree that combining See and Do can work fine in park articles, where it can be difficult to distinguish between attractions and activities, but I still find it strange to have a section called See and Do if it only includes See.  If there is really nothing to write in Do, just leave the section out as it is not mandatory

 * Peter, as you of course know, Project:Article templates and Project:Small city article template give details of sections. They are quite detailed, but nowhere do they say anything about the possibility of combining sections, on the contrary it is stated that the See section is mandatory, which is my basis for saying that it is in non-compliance not to have a See section.  I do of course think that practice and consensus are important sources to determine our procedures when our policies are not sufficiently clear.  But to say that because one article received a star despite deviations from MoS establishes a new practice which overrules our stated policy appears wrong.  Receiving a star despite one small weakness does not mean that a new practice has been established, and still the vast majority of our articles use AM/PM so that is the practice.  And in relation to the combination of See and Do, I do not see that the discussion on a particular park article implies that a general consensus has been reached, if a consensus is to overrule a written policy (See section being mandatory) the consensus should be very clear and reached at the appropriate talk page, not in a star discussion

 * ChubbyWimbus, as allready stated, I find it strange to name a section See and Do if it does not include Do, why not just leave out the Do section? I think it would be great to have the consensus written into the policy, but I do not think that the discussion referred to shows exactly what the consensus is about, so I think we shold discuss first on the appropriate talk page, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 21:50, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Two points I want to put in here:
 * I do agree with Claus that if there are no activities, then it makes sense to leave out the Do section, since it's not mandatory (in other words, just rename "See & Do" to "See", and we can get on with this star nomination). As far as I can tell, the only reason having a See & Do heading with no activities listed would make sense is if you were planning to add activities later, which would imply that the article is incomplete (which I doubt is the case here, as that would disqualify it for star).
 * But Claus, you wrote that your basis for saying that this article is in non-compliance is that the See section is mandatory. ...And? Are you saying that this article doesn't have a See section? As far as I see, the See section has merely been combined with Do, not eliminated, so your argument that this article is in violation of a clear policy on this basis baffles me. Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding your argument, but that's how I'm reading it. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:18, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

PerryPlanet, yes, the See section is mandatory, which I read as it has to be there and the name can not be changed. If someone used 'Attractions' instead of 'See' we would also change it to 'See' with the argument that that section is mandatory. The combination of See and Do is a deviation from the stated policy, which is allowable in special cases, and per consensus and practice such a special case exists for some parks, but I do not see that we have consensus or practice for allowing it, just because a destination is small, or because it has no activities. This is my basis for stating that the See and Do section here is not in compliance with policy, consensus or practice, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 23:32, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Changing "See" to "Attractions" is in violation of a clear policy, yes (in fact, Project:Section headers specifically mentions this rule). But combining section headers that do fit our standard section names violates no policy that I am familiar with. You said it yourself: nowhere in Project:Article templates does it say anything about the possibility of combining sections. It's a deviation from the norm, yes, but nowhere is this written into the policy. Perhaps this is an oversight that should be addressed in the policy in the future, but it's not written into the policy as of now. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 00:32, 23 June 2011 (EDT)

 * With all due respect, there are an awful lot of words written in this discussion about something not especially important. May I just suggest that somebody plunges forward and changes Project:Section headers and the relevant parts of Project:Article templates  to reflect a well-established practice - i.e. See and Do can be combined into one section when appropriate?--(WT-en) Burmesedays 01:59, 23 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Support. This Star discussion is really getting out of hand. It should be about the article, which according to me is fully worthy of being a Star and shouldn't become a victim of some outstanding policy issues we can't get resolved. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 08:54, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Never has so much been said about so little, eh? ;) Anyway, I took the plunge and incorporated this matter in policy...on Project:Section headers. However, reading Project:Article templates, I'm not quite sure how I should go about writing such a rule into that, so help there would be nice... (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 11:49, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

 * How about this? (WT-en) LtPowers 16:06, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Works for me! (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:58, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Support - Lovely little article. Nothing really stands out as needing to be corrected. (WT-en) texugo 02:34, 25 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Support - Just one small comment, "Tours run around 300 rubles. 70 rubles" looks a bit odd. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 08:06, 26 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Support - Some fine writing and one of the nicest looking maps on WT. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 09:05, 26 June 2011 (EDT)

Congratulations
With the first Russia's Star Article!

(WT-en) Andrey Selskiy 03:29, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

balneological?
My first attempt to do anything on Wikivoyage. I have to say that I spent about 8 hours in Staraya Russa about 10 years ago, and found it a bit "off the beaten path." The sanatorium is indeed one of the highlights of the town, but I have no idea what the term "balneological" means and suggest that no modern American reader has ever heard of that term. Rather, I'd guess that this is one of those English terms that got transfered to Russia a century or two ago that they just haven't given up on yet. Do any Brits, Australian, etc. folks know this word? Smallbones (talk) 16:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Бальнеологический (bal'neologicheskii) is the word, and it's something encountered all over the former Soviet Union to refer to these types of places. "Balneological" looks to be my own bastardization, as Wikipedia uses "balneologic." I'll change it. --Peter Talk 20:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 * But yes, it's a pretty obscure word in English. --Peter Talk 20:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 * It seems to me the same word (balneological) is used in the map as well. I would correct it myself, but can't find the .svg-file. Tbp386 (talk) 11:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

 * It's here, but I've gone ahead and changed it now. (You may need to refresh your browser window to see the updated version.) --Peter Talk 18:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, are there any monuments to Alyosha Fyodorovich Karamazov in the town? Lazarus1255 (talk) 23:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

A star article without a banner
Indeed, the article provides an enormous amount of relevant information but it lacks in a banner. It has to be correted :) 1Arena1hu (talk) 11:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added a temporary one based on the article's main page feature banner. I hope it's an improvement. :) --Nick talk 11:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Staraya Russa


text:
Talk:Stara Zagora

Possible copyvio
All of "Understand" and "See" sections seem to be copied straight from. However, looking more carefully, I have realized that it is highly likely that the author there is the same person as (WT-en) User:Rokambur (Rossitza Ohridska-Olson), who contributed the sections in question here. So I am taking the copyvio notice off the page for now, and it would be great if she can response to my message and verify for certain that she really is the author of that Facebook article (or whatever they call those out there). – (WT-en) Vidimian 04:57, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Stara Zagora


text:
Talk:Staten Island

Photos Would Be Nice
As someone who's never been to Staten Island, some aerial photos of it would be nice--especially on a TRAVEL website. Also, a few photos of some popular Staten Island destinations AND a few photos of some "secret" destinations (like a favorite eatery, museum, park, "watering hole", theater, park, pond, etc.) would be nice for us novices. "A picture's worth a thousand words."

Sections
Should it be broken down into North, East, West and South Shores, or North and South Shores? —The preceding comment was added by 68.174.242.217 (talk • contribs)

 * With the caveat that I'm a Manhattanite, I've never heard anyone talk about the east or west shores of Staten Island, but there are various neighborhoods, such as New Dorp, Tottenville, etc., etc. My feeling is, anyone who wants to should group the neighborhoods into North Shore and South Shore, but there should be only one article about Staten Island. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 06:29, 18 July 2010 (EDT)
 * I have the distinct impression that Staten Island is not a "huge city" by our standards. If we get to the point that we're districtifying Staten Island, I think we need to re-evaluate our guidelines!  (WT-en) LtPowers 08:43, 18 July 2010 (EDT)
 * I agree completely. Staten Island doesn't merit more than one article. However, dividing the neighborhoods into two categories within this article is not a bad idea. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 14:57, 18 July 2010 (EDT)

That is what I meant when I said to group it. Put what attractions are on the North Shore and South Shore. I didn't mean divide it into 20 different neighborhoods, just 2 sections that are fairly different (the North Shore is more urban) would suffice. —The preceding comment was added by 65.88.88.82 (talk • contribs)

Map
This article needs a map so I'm going to try to make one (WT-en) –sumone10154 00:57, 31 January 2011 (EST)

Organizing the See section
Staten Island is the official "Borough of Parks" so can the See section get a subsection for those? There is a ton of them (and I'm ready to add some), but jamming them all into the main See section would be pointless, not to mention worthless to a reader not interested in parks. Nick1372 (talk) 02:33, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course. By all means, go ahead and create the subsection and insert information within it. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Cross Island?
In the Get in section, the following text is found:

''Buses connect at the St George Ferry Terminal going to destinations all over Staten Island. The buses can be grouped according to their service area: […] Cross Island: S50s series (S51, S52)''

How is this possible? First off, there is no way that the S51 & S52 can be considered crosstown buses. The S51 travels along Bay Street and Father Cappodano Blvd, alongside the ocean, and ending in Midland Beach, halfway down the shoreline. The S52 takes a similar route, just a few blocks inland.

I would assume that the term "Cross Island" would be used to describe lines that are off the usual path, in this case to/from St. George. This would pertain to some of the routes mentioned at the bottom of the section, such as the S53, S57. However, this would also make it totally irrelevant in this section, as it is about getting in from the ferry.

Can I request that "Cross Island" be rephrased? I just have a hard time thinking of what to name it. Nick1372 (talk) 23:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

 * You can request, but I think you're more likely to do this well than anyone else. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you actually live on Staten Island, whereas I'm a Manhattanite and haven't actually been to Staten Island in several years. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

 * I must have phrased that wrong; I didn't request it in the way of asking someone else to do it, just if it was OK. I am perfectly happy to do it, I'm just at a loss as to what to name it. Is "East Shore' a good name?

 * BTW, you were right about me being a Staten Islander (and proud of it!). Nick1372 (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

 * I don't know about "East Shore." How would you describe where those lines go, if someone asked you? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

 * If they were a Staten Islander, I would tell them they were "Below Hylan" (as in Hylan Blvd). However, that wouldn't be remotely helpful to a traveler, as what we refer to as "below Hylan" isn't even south of the street! That specific area doesn't have a name, so to a traveler, I would either call it the South Beach area (per its biggest neighborhood) or as part of the wider East Shore. Nick1372 (talk) 23:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Anyone else have anything to add? If not, I'm going to go ahead and replace it with "East Shore". Nick1372 (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Changes I want to discuss
A few months ago, I started to revamp this page, and I did a lot of work on it. I left for a while, and came back with fresh eyes. There are a few issues I want to discuss. What does everyone else think? Thanks, Nick1372 (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Is there a reason this doesn't have an Understand section? It needs one.
 * 2) Can we move that bus info to the Get Around section? It shouldn't really be in the ferry part of the Get In section.
 * 3) The Eat section is not very well done (pun totally not intended). When I organized the mess it used to be in May, User:Ikan Kekek informed me on my talk page that my organization was not the standard style of Wikivoyage. I presented a compromise, he didn't like it, and I wasn't too satisfied with it either. So, I though about it, and I was wondering: why do we have those other cuisines in the first place? No one comes to Staten Island for the Mexican food. My new proposal is this: We get rid most of the international cuisines, move the Cargo Cafe to drink, as it has a bar, and then sort the Italian listings into price ranges. We might keep the Sri Lankan listings, becuase that's a rarity in the United States, but there's something wrong with them (one references being next to the other but the addresses are totally different).
 * 4) The lead is horrible. We should not have a lead paragraph in which the first incentive for coming to Staten Island is to stay in a hotel & visit other places. However, that can wait until the rest of the article is in shape.
 * It's been a few days without replies, so I'm going to start doing a few of these things, but I still want all of your opinions on the eat section dilemma. Nick1372 (talk) 23:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

 * I don't have any great ideas for the eat section (will have to think about that some), but I agree with you completely on the lead: I'd suggest kicking that line down to the top of the Sleep section, and overwriting the ridiculous assertion that "SI has three hotels". Just because we don't have the other few dozen listed doesn't mean they don't exist!
 * For the express bus info, I'd like to chop it down seriously and just reference that express buses from Manhattan do exist, here's the fare, here's a link to the MTA page with the schedules. There are too many of them, and our beloved MTA changes the routes and schedules so capriciously, that listing individual routes and times will go out of date very soon if it isn't already.
 * I've found Understand sections are surprisingly hard to write. Probably the reason no one else has stepped up yet.  -- D. Guillaume (talk) 02:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Sorry, Nick, I didn't see this until now. I think that it's fine to list any good restaurant including a Mexican one, because though few would go to Staten Island specifically to eat Mexican food, you might want to have some while you're there. I know that doesn't really address any central issues; I'll try to get to those a bit later. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I agree that the express bus section needs chopping down; in fact I think the whole section needs cleaning up. I'll start doing that right now. Nick1372 (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've rewritten the lead—what does everyone think? Nick1372 (talk) 04:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I edited it. I also think Staten Island was several villages, never one rural town. Am I wrong? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. I'll change the wording a little. Nick1372 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I added an Understand section with some general info and an Orientation section. I'll add a history section too, but I want to double-check some facts.

Now that there's an Understand section, do you think this article qualifies for guide status? Nick1372 (talk) 00:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I think it's been a Guide for a while, hasn't it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Big facepalm there. I have no clue how I missed that… Nick1372 (talk) 20:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Update?
User:Nick1372, are you still reading this site? Would you like to update the article to prepare for an Off the beaten path nomination? Or would anyone else like to update? I'd enjoy seeing the "forgotten borough" featured on the front page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Geo coordinates
Unfortunately very few of the things listed here have geo coordinates. I think we should add them... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Mapshape
Does anyone know why it is shading in the island but not the waters around it? A look on OSM shows that there is nothing wrong, so it seems to be something on our side. Does anyone know how to fix it? -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Staten Island


text:
Talk:St. Augustine

Copyvios?
Some of this seems to be a copyvio from www.staugustine.com/visit/events/upcoming.shtml (which I can't get to right now, but the Google cache shows it). Some probably isn't. Also, there seems to be some messed-up markup. Someone should take a look at this. I don't have the time right now. (WT-en) Jonboy 12:46, 16 Feb 2006 (EST) Hmm, if I google "humor, poems, and sotries", for example, I get. It might be worth waiting for our latest anonymous contributor to get tired and just do a revert. (WT-en) Jonboy 12:59, 16 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * I find that most of the time copyvioed stuff doesn't meet our MoS anyway so a serious round of formatting and editing should solve the problem. Obviously we'll need to rewrite anything that's a literal copy from somewhere else... I'll take a stab at it. And I'll clean out the html too. (WT-en) Majnoona 13:28, 16 Feb 2006 (EST)

Broken Redirects

 * Sorry about that I tried applying the redirect tag from other pages to this page, but now all I'm getting is the redirect tag instead of the page. Can someone fix? Also can someone do the redirect for these pages St Augustine, Saint Augustine, and St Auggie, since those are names people might search under. Thanks. User:(WT-en) Aplusjimages
 * It is all fixed now... hang in there, it is never too hard to fix. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 13:37, 16 March 2006 (EST)

where did this page go, i notice it was recently updated and seems to be gone now. if anyone knows where it went or if they could resubmit the template i would like to add some contributions to it.199.72.72.165 12:52, 16 March 2006 (EST)
 * Page should be coming up properly now. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 13:37, 16 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:St. Augustine


text:
Talk:St Augustine

I started this page, but I'm unable to finish it. I live in Jacksonville, and have visited St Augustine a couple of times, but it would be best if someone from the area could help fill it out.

title: Talk:St Augustine


text:
Talk:Stavropol Krai

"even by Russian standards, with very corrupt officials. They will, however, probably be thrown off by rare Western tourists and avoid extorting bribes.'"

Ignorant and biased opinion that is not remotely truth to many people opinion. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 75.118.148.170 (talk • contribs)

 * I did write this, and while it is clearly biased and subjective, and perhaps anecdotal, I disagree that it is ignorant. I was in transit at the MinVody airport, where the whole plane was detained for 30 hours while the entire plain full of travelers were made to pay bribes! Three passengers did not pay bribes, including myself, and we were the three non-CIS nationals on the plane. That too was clearly no coincidence—we were sent to a separate room for a confused interrogation after they refused to take our bribes! Anyway, since this is rather anecdotal, I'd happily re-write the section towards something more boring, but it should be noted that the MinVody airport officials are corrupt, and that it is not a nice airport in terms of facilities. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:48, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Stavropol Krai


text:
Talk:Stay safe

I've moved this section from Edinburgh, becuase I didn't feel it was that appropriate there. It needs some work, but do people think it is worth having a general article like this? -- (WT-en) DanielC 09:46, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Yes, though I think the article could be better titled, say Personal security or even simply Staying safe, to go along with the Stay safe section of the template. The advice is too general for cities and is applicable at the beach, in remote car parks, in rural places, or pretty much anywhere. Remember criminals take holidays too, and crime against tourists is often opportunist, because the criminal on tour takes advantage of people relaxing their guard when they are relaxing and enjoying their holiday. - (WT-en) Huttite 05:17, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Note: Page subsequently moved from Staying Safe in Cities to Staying Safe by (WT-en) DanielC -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:54, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I moved the article from Staying Safe to Staying safe because travel topic articles should only have an inital capital that way they can be used in text like ... you may have trouble staying safe here ... -- (WT-en) Huttite 09:00, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

The bleedin' obvious
I've restructured this page, and added a few more bleedin' obvious things, to the existing list.

Maybe this article may become a list of things so obvious, that we don't need to include them in the Stay safe section of other articles. I really think telling people not to flash around their wallet, or to use a condom, etc apply globally, and really don't rate too much of a mention elsewhere. --(WT-en) Inas 21:28, 11 November 2008 (EST)

 * To this end, this article should probably be called Stay safe. The article titles are consistent, but the name of the article isn't.  I have a background objective here, to try and get rid of some of the information that is repeated in every article.  There are so many articles that have repeat that your credit card or bank may charge you a fee for using an overseas ATM.  True enough, but its always true, and could be repeated in every guide.  If we are going to have travel tips articles, then we should have a brief set to read before you travel anywhere, laying down the basics.  This information then doesn't need to be repeated everywhere.  They would be the prologue to every printed travel guide.  --(WT-en) Inas 15:52, 5 December 2008 (EST)

 * I'd also like to change the title to Stay safe—since that's a Wikivoyage convention. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:41, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 * I think the fact that I had to write "stay safe" instead of "staying safe" in the lead paragraph is a really good sign that it'll be a lot easier for people to add wikilinks to stay safe in other articles than staying safe. I'll move it.  (WT-en) JYolkowski 15:34, 7 December 2008 (EST)

 * Agree that this article does not comply to No advice from Captain Obvious. It should be made more brief. /Yvwv (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just looked at that, I am a newcomer so take a pinch of salt, but it doesn't seem to be what that page means. That page is discussing general safety tips applicable to all places, probably including where the traveler lives, that don't need constant repetition, much less on every individual destination and article. But this isn't a destination page, it's a single point of reference for all the principle advice about staying safe, and the page visitors use to learn about safety specifically, so it's sensible to include a bit more. This page is not what the "Captain Obvious" page is discussing, as most of the contents don't apply to every place or every travel, and a lot is not that obvious to all travelers from all countries. Travel4thesakeofit (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Oh, actually this article is intended to be advice from Captain Obvious, so that people don't put it in destination guides. Respect has the same purpose. --Peter Talk 16:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Yep, what he said :-) Travel4thesakeofit (talk) 16:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Following local advice
I noticed that one of the bullets in the "Buy" section suggests following local advice, while one of the bullets in the "Eat" section says not to follow local advice. I'm thinking the article should probably be a bit more consistent (-: Personally, I'm leaning towards not trusting local advice in general, since a few locals may be trying to trap or scam tourists, and even well-meaning locals may not be aware of differences between themselves and tourists that may render their advice invalid.  Any other thoughts on this?  If no-one disagrees I'll update the article shortly.  (WT-en) JYolkowski 18:23, 19 February 2009 (EST)

 * It depends on where and what. Ask a cyclo where the best market is in Saigon?  Waste of time.  Ask a National Park ranger where the best swimming spots are in Kakadu free from crocodiles?  Absolutely.  There are few absolutes in travelling, and wikivoyage can't free anyone from having to use some common sense.  Follow some simple rules to decide who you trust, and only follow the advice of those that you do. --(WT-en) Inas 23:13, 19 February 2009 (EST)

Risk evaluation box
Hmm. I think the risk evaluation box at Tokyo (copied here for reference) is interesting, but it should be properly templatized, and above all we need to agree on what the levels are and what they mean, in more detail that the current general levels. Eg. for Tokyo, which is at very high risk of earthquakes, I don't think "Nature: Low" is appropriate. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:21, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I would like a standardized, templatized evaluation box in more destination articles, but I was unsuccessful creating a template. When it comes to earthquakes, I might agree bumping the risk level up to Moderate. /(WT-en) Blist 12:24, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm leery of this idea. I'd rather see detailed prose in the stay safe section—these sort of one-line boxes are really easy to change without any work, and thus invite trivial edit wars. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:35, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

 * All respect due to good intentions, of course, but I'd prefer to stick with prose instead of forms to be filled out. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:22, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I Agree with (WT-en) Peter and (WT-en) Gorilla Jones. I'd like to see an effective example before considering making a template.  --(WT-en) inas 19:28, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Since there was never any real consensus on this, anybody object if I remove the risk assessment box. I doesn't look like a direction we are heading in, does it?  --(WT-en) inas 22:07, 14 February 2010 (EST)

 * I think that would be the right thing to do. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:35, 15 February 2010 (EST)

Section titles
Hi, everyone. I don't think shoehorning this article into a standard structure makes sense. For example "Get in" should be changed to "Before you go," as no actual advice about getting in is addressed. Some of the other section titles make greater sense, but still might be worth discussing, if other section titles might improve the clarity of the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm new, but I'd agree. This is a page people will read for guidance and doesn't fit sections designed for destinations. How about, Before you go (checklist of things to check up on and consider), and then a section Travel sense (nicer title than "risk" which may put people off!) with subsections for situations - General, Getting in (travel between places and arrival in places), Staying (places to stay, sleep, etc), Travel round, Eat and drink, Possessions, Health, Buy and sell, Connect, and end up with Laws and customs and Emergency. Travel4thesakeofit (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, if we're going to have "Getting in," we should keep that as "Get in"; "Travel round," should remain "Get around"; "Health" should remain "Stay Healthy"; "Buy and sell" can remain "Buy"; and "Staying" can remain "Sleep." I doubt there's an important reason to customize those subtitles here, any more than in any other article. But for the rest, I think any section title that's pertinent and snappy is likely to be good. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Links to travel warning sites
Hi, all! Normally we do not have sections with external links in our articles. However, what would you think about adding a section to this article with links to and similar services by governments from major English speaking countries. Yes, I'm very aware that the Stay safe sections in the articles, not external sites, are the place where the information should be. However for smaller and less traveled countries, for example in central Africa or the Pacific islands, I'm afraid the information in our articles is in practice either outdated or not very detailed. Government travel advisories are in general updated 2-4 times yearly or even more frequently. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

HIV prevention drug?
First question is why does HIV redirect to this article rather than to Stay healthy.

Canada has just approved a drug to reduce risk of HIV transmission. At $1000/month, it is not likely to be really popular, but it may be worth mentioning. Pashley (talk) 13:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Most likely the redirect was created by someone unaware of the existence of this page or before this page came into being... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've changed the redirect to point to Infectious diseases. Not perfect, as technically there's a difference between sexually transmitted and merely sexually transmissible, but there seems to be nothing much about HIV/AIDS at stay healthy. K7L (talk) 19:26, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

BBC's list of 6 well-governed countries
This could be of interest for certain articles of wide geographic scope, including Retiring abroad and Working abroad, though of course some of these countries may be relatively difficult to retire to or get jobs in as a foreigner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think that article gets everything right. For a start, no matter what political position you take in the U.S., you have to agree that it is overall a well-governed country. I'm a little surprised, also, that the United Kingdom isn't on that list considering it's a BBC article. Maybe because they do not think BREXIT is a good sign for the country. These kinds of articles are always quickly written, without seriously considering the success of the countries. I'm sure these countries are well-run, but so are many other countries. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 11:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm absolutely floored by this reply. I think it's probably best for no-one to give a substantive reply to it. Let's nip any arguments in the bud. I posted this link purely because I thought that on a global travel guide, it would be interesting. Let's let Selfie have his own views and not reply to them with our own opinions or counterpoints, please. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ikan Kekek, I'm surprised you took my comment so personally and I'm absolutely floored by your reply. I just have some criticisms of the article you linked to, I'm not personally criticizing or personally attacking you or the fact that you linked to it. If you seriously have this much of an issue with my opinions of the article in question, this really is your problem, not mine, and you really need to reconsider how you're taking my comment. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 14:25, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I do not see anything about taking it personally. Why would a country that is seldom in the top 6 of any related measures be in the BBC top 6 list? Usually being in the top 20 of many such measures is not enough. But this is not the place to discuss the governance of a country or how to collect top countries lists, as IK notes. --LPfi (talk) 14:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I believe that saying "I'm absolutely floored by this reply" is taking it personally. What else is it? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 14:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A statement of shock, not taking it "personally". Do some more reading and reflection if you want to understand why a global news organization might not consider those two countries among the 6 best-ruled in the world; I certainly have no interest in having an argument with you about that, nor should anyone else. And note that the U.S. was specifically compared to Canada in the section on Canada. Did you actually read the article? If not, read it before drawing firm conclusions about it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Back to Ikan's original point, it can surely be interesting. I hadn't actually considered Chile or Botswana potential retirement destinations before, but seems they are worth considering :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

 * It is an interesting list. It appears to be based on a set of indexes listed in he first paragraph:, and . I think that it might be more useful to link to these indexes in articles. This would allow readers to consider whether the police or hospitals are likely to be as good in the country they are thinking of retiring to compared to where they are at the moment. I realise that this is duller than just saying "retire to Denmark", but I expect that most readers will already have a shortlist of retirement destination based on previous travels, climate etc. AlasdairW (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

 * What I don't understand is, why can't travelers just write this information from personal experience? For example, if we have a contributor who has been to Denmark, they can write about how good the hospital services are there. I think that is what we should encourage, rather than external links. However, it may be okay to have those links temporarily until a traveler can write information based on experience. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 00:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Putting such links in articles would be an exception to this site's external links guidelines. Which articles would you like to put them into? Only Retiring abroad, or any others? We could probably discuss this at Talk:Retiring abroad if it's only relevant to that article. And the argument in favor of them is that they are an attempt at comparison based on more than someone's personal impression or limited personal experience. Note that hospital services in many countries vary widely based on how much money you can pay out of pocket and/or on which hospital you are taken to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes. Few travellers have experienced the health care in more than a couple, perhaps a dozen countries, and probably few situations where they were at the mercy of the institution. Having got the right treatment might have been sheer luck, and a positive experience might have depended on a few key persons. General well-governance is easier, as you get a feel for whether local people trust their institutions and how frustrated they are about the bureaucracy. Still, we cannot write anything like an objective top ten list. Linking is useful for getting the details, as there are many aspects and also methodological problems (which requires linking the study itself, or its sponsor if it is part of a series). --LPfi (talk) 09:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Interesting discussion. I guess that what means well-governed to some people might feel like a straightjacket to others. In well-governed countries it is often expected that subjects also perform accordingly, which could make it "boring" to some folks and "secure" to others. Just my 2 cents worth. Philaweb (talk) 01:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Emergency calls
I noted the section on emergency calls in United Kingdom. I suppose most of the advice, including that of not hanging up before told so, is relevant in many countries, and should be included here in some form. Now we only have a bullet point in #Connect saying you might want to carry a phone. I think emergency calls should have a section or subsection of their own. --LPfi (talk) 08:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Could we get a map showing the number in different places? 911 for US & Canada, 999 in UK, I'm not sure what elsewhere. Pashley (talk) 00:42, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

 * 112 in Most of Europe, 000 in Australia, IIRC.  (see File:Emergency telephone numbers in the world.svg,  Fuller table at :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_emergency_telephone_numbers

112 works in the the Uk as well as 999. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

"Most incidents don’t kill you or cripple you"
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-09-04/world-s-most-dangerous-countries-to-travel-to-aren-t-that-scary —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:13, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for linking to this article, which at first I would have dismissed; however, it gives insight to an aspect of world travel I normally wouldn't give a second thought. I wouldn't take the whole article as Gospel, but I would certainly consider much of it, as it is written well by someone who obviously has vast travel experience. I'm not sure we can apply this information to Wikivoyage articles, but I think we can apply it to our attitudes when we edit here. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 00:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, but continuing the earlier "Don't visit" discussion: those government advisories have an immediate practical effect, because your travel insurance will have a standard clause excluding any cover for travel against such advice. So a turned ankle or cardiac collapse would be all at your expense, ruinous if it came to a medevac. Grahamsands (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that only applies to the most stringent warnings, and even then the results may not be total cancellation. I looked at one policy which said that it would not pay for "political evacuations" if there were warnings of political unrest, or medical conditions caused by some travel-warning-related things (e.g., injuries from acts of terrorism, Ebola if your home country said not to go there because of Ebola).  I got the impression that they were concerned about the "Avoid unnecessary travel" and "Do not travel" levels, rather than the "Exercise caution" level.  I didn't see anything that suggested that they'd deny coverage if you sprained your ankle in a museum; the limits seemed to be focused on warning-related reasons.  They seemed more concerned about Pakistan and Afghanistan than in places with milder warnings, like France, Germany, and Mexico.  But they were willing to give me a quote for Afghanistan anyway, so there must be something they're willing to cover there.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That's very interesting. I'll reply a bit on a tangent, but our experience with medical insurance in the U.S. would cause us to be a bit cautious in assuming that a company that claims to insure something absolutely wouldn't try to weasel out of paying anything if needed. In other words, the fact that someone gives you a quote for Afghanistan in no way proves they'd pay out if you needed that. But I'll take your inference that they are at least suggesting they would. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:02, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * True. In fact, I'd expect them to try to weasel out of as much as possible.  It could be that, in practice, the Afghanistan quote would cover only "lost luggage" or something similarly trivial.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:38, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Back-tracking to Justin's article, another consideration is that upgrades to warnings get shouted from the rooftops, but downgrades pass quietly by. At some point in recent weeks the UK has put almost all of Lebanon into green, including Baalbek and Byblos which were long red. The world won't notice until the country's tourist agency launches a charm offensive to win back its lost trade. Grahamsands (talk) 22:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That's a very interesting thought. On that note, could we include a dynamic map, somewhere on Wikivoyage, showing which areas of the world are "green" and which are "red"? Perhaps it could be included in Stay safe or a similar article. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 20:43, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That is a massive job, and a huge oversimplification of a complex issue. For example, at the moment I would happily travel to Hong Kong if I arrived on Monday and left on Thursday, but I would want to avoid being there at the weekend, as protests generally occur at then. Unless you can create a bot to read 5 or more government travel pages daily and update the map accordingly, we should leave this to others. AlasdairW (talk) 17:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Crowbars
Is carrying a crowbar really something people do or we should recommend? It is heavy and thus inconvenient for all but car travellers. As we say in the article: focus your energy on taking preventative steps proportional to the actual risks. Is this a proportional preventive step? All around the world? Should you only buy the crowbar locally when you see the padlock on the emergency exit and cannot change hotels for your one week stay? What about demanding it be removed? –LPfi (talk) 08:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

"People with needs"
"Before you go" uses the phrasing "Pets, children and people with needs" to describe special groups of travellers. To my ear, "people with needs" is a strange phrasing -- what needs? and doesn't that apply to everyone? -- but I'm unsure of a simple improvement. In part, this is because of how uselessly general the current phrasing is, so it's unclear what exactly it's supposed to get at. My first thought was it applied to illness or disability, so I considered "people with special needs", but this itself has awkward implications. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 15:20, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

 * I changed it to "special needs", revert if you find that awkward. We have advice for seniors, nervous flyers, people with high blood pressure, disabilities or mental health conditions; travellers with a criminal history, budget travellers, women, lone travellers, LGBT folks and naturists (mostly linked from Concerns), and people with diets (Concerns). I think those are the main groups meant (although not all are about safety), along with people with other medical conditions or socio-psychological issues. Didn't we have an article on those with Asperger? Oh, seems included in disabilities. –LPfi (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Would "special concerns" be better? –LPfi (talk) 15:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've tried 'special concerns' and added a parenthesis on examples. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Article length and disposition
I think this article is long enough that it is unusable. This is meant to cover also quite a lot of Captain Obvious advice, thus targeted at people unused to travel. There is a whole lot to digest even if we leave out the cruft. The disposition being unusual doesn't help, and I'd say the disposition is messy. I am thinking about doing something radical when having some time. Opinions? –LPfi (talk) 17:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 * I skipped through it. What would you remove? If nothing should be removed, there's always the possibility of creating more headings for greater ease in reading. But I'd suggest that this kind of article is for reference and doesn't have to be read through from beginning to end to be a useful repository of information. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The thing I object to most is the Travel sense section, which includes Get in, Get around, Sleep & al, in non-standard order. We have Travel sense → See → Don't attempt to fight off a thief.
 * If we want to have this as a quick reference for different situations, then the disposition needs to be good; we need no Travel sense super-section and how to handle thieves should not be in See.
 * As a guide for novice travellers, the article should be written also for being read or skimmed through in its entirety.
 * Reading the article more carefully, I agree that there is not much to be cut down on. The article was just overwhelming, probably primarily because of the problematic structure.
 * –LPfi (talk) 06:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, fighting or not fighting off robbers is not about seeing things. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I changed the structure more to my liking. Revert if you find it worse now. Next step would be to check what advice is redundant or in the wrong section (I did some such tweaks, but e.g. See is unchanged). –LPfi (talk) 07:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Stay safe


text:
Talk:St. Charles

Neither Missouri or Illinois is big-time famous, and there are still more St Charles places, so redirect should point to disambiguation page instead of missouri. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 19:27, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:St. Charles


text:
Talk:St. Clair County (Michigan)

Regions in St. Clair County?
What is the regions section doing in here? – (WT-en) CurvyEthyl 00:35, 2 October 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:St. Clair County (Michigan)


text:
Talk:St Davids

title St. David's? --(WT-en) Ppmk 17:21, 19 April 2008 (EDT)
 * I've set up a redirect for that spellling and for Saint Davids and Tyddewi. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Tarr3n (talk • contribs)

title: Talk:St Davids