text:
Talk:Bangkok/Phahonyothin

I'm kind of wondering where to draw the arbitrary line between "Sukhumvit" and "North". I guess the most obvious marker would be where Sukhumvit's sois end, namely Petchaburi Rd? So everything north of that -- including Ratchadaphisek and RCA is then North.

Or maybe we could just define North as all the places where the tourists don't go but the Thais do =) (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:28, 9 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * Now there's a Din Daeng article, should North start from Lat Phrao/Kamphaeng Phet? That leaves Chatuchak and Central Plaza just in North. Most of Rachadaphisek would move to Din Daeng −(WT-en) Woodstone 17:13, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * I don't think you can plausibly call Victory Monument/Ari/Saphan Khwai as "Ratchadaphisek" or "Din Daeng"... how about moving this area to Bangkok/Phayonyothin, and using Vibhavadi-Rangsit as a convenient dividing line?  Also note that there exists a Rangsit page for bits really north of Bangkok. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:42, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Do you mean to rename "North" to "Phahonyothin" (excluding Rachadaphisek) and leave "Din Daeng" as is (including Rachadaphisek)? That seems a good division to me. Be careful expressing Vibhavadi (RTGS Wiphawadi) as boundary because it crosses Phahonyothin (at Lat Phrao). −(WT-en) Woodstone 16:05, 12 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * I mean rename North to Phahonyothin and leave the Din Daeng article content as is, but I still don't like Din Daeng as a name — I used to live there, and I don't think it can be used to cover the entire area that you mean by it. What do you think is wrong with using Rachadaphisek as the name?  It's the main street, the one with the subway and the one with all the attractions in the area...

 * And yeah, you're right about the two streets crossing. Not sure what to do about it though, the two major points that could fit in either are Lad Phrao and Don Muang... (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:46, 12 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * With North renamed to Phahonyothin, renaming Din Daeng to Rachadaphisek makes more sense. The only problem I see is that there is a part of Rachadaphisek alongside the Queen Sirikit Centre, which should not be included. However, since most people (even Bangkokians) don't know that and apart from the QSC there is nothing noteworthy there, this can perhaps be ignored. Next to Lad Phrao and Don Mueang, of course Chatuchak fits in Phahonyothin. −(WT-en) Woodstone 13:50, 13 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Both renames performed as discussed. −(WT-en) Woodstone 16:18, 20 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Ratchada rename
Wish I had seen this thread earlier or been contacted before you renamed things. I don't like the rename to Ratchaphisek district for the sole reason that Ratchaphisek road also runs south of Sukhemvit (around the queen S. convention center the name changes back from being Asoke). I've given people direction before to xxx on Ratchafa road and there has been confusion as to which stretch I was talking about.

The districts N. of Sukhemvit in order are Din Daeng, Huay Kwang, and Lad Phrao. Maybe we pick one of those, or possible use all 3.

Thoughts ???

 * It was mentioned in the discussion before the rename, that there is a southern piece of Ratchadaphisek along the Queen Sirikit Centre. However there are almost no other significant buildings/activities on that stretch of road and most Bangkokians do not even know it. Directing a taxi to Ratchadaphisek will certainly never bring you to that part. So it is a negligeable drawback. "North" was a very vague and locally not used term. A triple name is not convenient. Din Daeng comes closer, but does not fit well with the Huai Khwang part. −(WT-en) Woodstone 06:51, 27 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Reflections
Reflections the restaurant actually predates the hotel. The restaurant is in a separate two-story building and is very much an independent landmark, not your typical anonymous hotel restaurant. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:29, 14 October 2007 (EDT)

 * ...and even after reading the website I'm pretty confused as to what exactly they're doing: are the renovations of the main bldg finished already? (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:35, 14 October 2007 (EDT)

 * I also wasted a fair bit of time chasing around that website - I got the impression they currently might not even be open for business at all. I'll be looking in on them about a fortnight from now. ~ 202.71.45.37 07:05, 14 October 2007 (EDT)

They've moved again!? Cripes. I'm no longer convinced the original restaurant is still operating, so I'll pull it out for the moment... (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:12, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

 * Reflections, Ari Soi 3, tel. +66-22703344, . This happening two-floor restaurant decorated in kitschy primary colors packs in a good crowd nightly with its excellent Thai food. Dishes from 50 baht, although live seafood costs considerably more. Note that Reflections has moved from its previous location to a new location around the corner, about 300 meters down Ari Soi 3.

Praise
This is a great article. Whoever is writing the Ari section, did a wonderful job. I'd like to add a restaraunt. It's called Tang-O, it's on Phahonyothin 5, near Ari Soi 5. Actually I'm not sure if it's Phahonyothin 5 or Rama 6 Soi 30, as my address is the Rama rd one. I'm not sure where to weigh in as far as renaming. Could you call this part of town Phayathai? What about making small articles and naming them after the BTS naming conventions? Also, I am in this area if anyone needs any groundwork done. Thanks.--(WT-en) Skettios 02:58, 14 November 2007 (EST)

 * Ta! I lived in Ari for a while and loved it, and even wrote about it for an in-flight rag (story here).

 * As for district naming, this has been debated before, but to me Phayathai is the bit of Phahonyothin south of Victory Monument near the BTS station the same name. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:15, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

Or Tor Kor, Thai price?
By its name may sound friendly-pricing, but de facto, the price there is 2-3 times more expensive than supermarkets, for the same quality of products. I'd recommend that it would be the last place for backpackers to buy food. Tops, Carrefour or Villa Market is much better.

Inaccurate map
The map that shows the Ari area is wrong - it has Reflections on it in the old location. Whoever uploaded it, can this be removed? The map's good otherwise. (WT-en) Dantilley 09:06, 5 February 2009 (EST)

 * I created a new map for Ari. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:19, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

Som Tum Bangkok
I also moved Som Tum Bangkok into the midrange section as it's about the same price range as Baan Mae Yui (mind you, both should be budget really by tourist standards, but the budget section seems to be for street-food prices only). (WT-en) Dantilley 09:05, 5 February 2009 (EST)

reflections
I've removed the entry;
 * Far and away the wackiest place to stay in north Bangkok, Reflections is a super-kitschy hotel. Each of the rooms has been designed by a different interior designer. Expect a full dose of clashing colors, bright plastic furniture and colorful mood lighting. Rooms from 2250 baht with breakfast. Note: Reflections moved in 2008, the new location is less convenient and has no longer the pool.

I can't see how it can remain accurate if the place has moved.. --(WT-en) inas 21:40, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Huh? Take a look at the website -- every word of that description still applies.  The warning is there to note that, if people have read eg. the glowing review in the New York Times, the pool is gone and the location isn't in the hip Ari neighborhood anymore. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:31, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

Guesthouse listing closed
This guesthouse closed down for the time being:

 * Basic, but is quite a fine guest house if you're willing to use a shared bathroom. It is clean and neat and some of the showers even have warm water. Another amenities offered are free wifi and a restaurant with a 60-baht continental breakfast buffet and various Thai and other dishes. Asha is currently closed, please contact Mike at Asha for updated information.

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:17, 10 August 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Bangkok/Phahonyothin


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Pratunam

Pratunam star discussion
Third district I nominate for Star status in Bangkok. Please let me know where it needs changes or additions in order for it to become a Star :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:21, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Almost. Some comments below.  Just suggestions, and none of them are individually important enough to keep this fine article from receiving the star, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 14:39, 20 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Intro, "It is another ...": appears unclear what it refers to
 * Understand, "which is where the district got its name from": I would leave this out
 * Understand: maybe there is a bit too much repetition in this section from other sections
 * Map: why is eat no 3 in this article, as it from the map appears to be in another district?
 * Listings: more Thai and transcription would be nice, if possible
 * Rooftop bar: this listing might be a violation of the principle of only one listing each
 * If possible, an intro to the see section would be nice
 * Bangkok Dolls Museum: I would leave out the mentioning of winning a competition in 1978 in Poland
 * Phaya Thai Palace: no need to mention opening hours twice
 * Thai Labour Museum: I do not understand "Modern media are used to present the material, such as television, slides and computers"
 * Buy: from the intro and Understand I would have expected more listings in the buy section
 * If possible, an intro to the drink section would be nice

 * I have dedicated some time to fix the issues:
 * Fixed.
 * Fixed.
 * I have taken some parts out that were duplicated. I hope its OK now, give it a re-read :)
 * The reason for this is that a few streets here (the Ratchawithi sois) are best reached using the BTS to Victory Monument. I have adapted the map accordingly to add this area.
 * I have added all the Thai names I could find.
 * Hmm, good point. I have now merged both of them under the See section.
 * There is almost nothing to See in Pratunam, that's why nothing was written there. I have now added a few sentences.
 * Fixed. Although Poland is very highly regarded in the dolls world I've heard ;-)
 * Fixed.
 * Rephrased it.
 * I understand what you mean. Before I used "Pratunam Market" to refer to the whole area, but I have now added some separate indoor malls that are located there (Pratunam Market now only refers to the outdoors market). Please re-read the Buy section, as I rewrote it extensively. I had to enlarge the map to fit the new icons on it, so please take another look at the map as well.
 * Added a few sentences.
 * Alright, I hope it's better this way! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 22:27, 25 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Support, no furhter comments, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 01:33, 26 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Support. Excellent city district guide. I did a few little touch ups. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:07, 26 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Amazing. I go away for a week and when I get back there ar 4 new star nominations! Looks good at a glance, and I will try to go through it more carefully during the next week. Cheers, • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 09:02, 26 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Support. Looks good to me. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 13:29, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

Result: Star.

Dynamic map or not?
The current static map is great, but it hasn't been updated since 2012 and a dynamic map would be much easier to update and add entries to. On the other hand, the dynamic map is all in Thai due to how OpenStreetMap works, which can confuse many tourists who don't know it. What would the best thing to do be in this case? MSG17 (talk) 12:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Bangkok/Pratunam


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Ratchadaphisek

Din Daeng
Erm. First, this area is (technically) covered under Bangkok/North, and second, I'm not sure "Din Daeng" is the best name for it. Howzabout Bangkok/Rachadaphisek? (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:33, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Locally it's more known as Din Daeng. Especially the highway signs are heavy with Din Daeng. I agree it must be untangled from "north". There is some overlap, especially about low rachadapisek. −(WT-en) Woodstone 17:02, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Let's continue this discussion at Talk:Bangkok/North. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:40, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Moved from "Din Daeng" to "Rachadaphisek" as discussed under previous "North", now renamed to "Phahonyothin". −(WT-en) Woodstone 16:14, 20 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Ratcha vs Racha
"Ratchadaphisek" with a T is the form used by the Metro station and it gets 35,000 hits on Google vs. around 8000 for "Rachadaphisek", so I've taken the liberty of moving the page. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:51, 20 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * That seems indeed to be by far the most common romanisation. I had just removed inconsistencies without checking common usage first. The Thai spelling has only one character, but allows both "ch" and "tch" as correct romanisations. −(WT-en) Woodstone 08:52, 21 Aug 2005 (EDT)

AirBNB listing
When I saw their URL in a "guesthouse" listing, I said "Hold it!" I used their services to rent a flat in London last summer and made out well, but if we allow such listings, that's just a step up from allowing anyone who advertises a sublet (legal or illegal) in Craigslist to post a listing here. So while the hosts may be great people and their dwelling may be a terrific place to stay, I think it's quite far over the line for the type of apartment rental we should be willing to consider allowing under Project:Accommodation listings. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Ikan Kekek (talk • contribs)

 * However - removing a whole, legitimate entry is not an efficient way of encouraging people (especially new users) to contribute to WikiTravel. Simply removing the Airbnb link is a way to "improve" the entry while keeping the new information. Similar to hotels.com and hostelworld.com, airbnb.com has many different types of accommodation... —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 101.108.21.217 (talk • contribs)

 * What makes you sure it's a "legitimate entry" under the Wikivoyage policies referenced above? But in any case, if you think it is, go ahead and restore it without the airbnb link. You don't need my permission to do that. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 13:58, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

 * I see you did do that. I will consider your point. I think I may be a little fast on the trigger lately, due to dealing with a lot of touting, etc. However, I'm still a bit skeptical that we can judge which listings on AirBNB are OK to list here, even without that link. What criteria are you using to judge the entry in question? Are you personally familiar with the place? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 15:28, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

Ratchada Night Market closed
The Night Bazaar at the corner of Ratchada & Lad Prao has been closed since late 2011. Some sort of new mall is being constructed on that site. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 2012 58.11.102.69 (talk • contribs)

 * Thanks for the update. The Suan Lum Night Bazaar will be reconstructed at that place. I will fix the article accordingly. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 15:24, 18 January 2012 (EST)

title: Talk:Bangkok/Ratchadaphisek


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Siam Square

Buying Mobiles
MBK is the best place to buy Mobile phones, the 4th floor is a place dedicated to phones. Before buying a phone you have to be sure that the mobile bands will work in your country (For example in the web willmyphonework.net they show you which band has your country) and of course ask for unlocked devices. On the 4th floor there are plenty of stores to buy phones. After you know which model o phone you are looking for you have 3 Options where to buy it. 1- Big shops and trust Local: Like oppo, Dtac, etc. Not as cheap, but there is no risk. There is no haggle in stores like this. 2- Small shops that only sells sealed boxes: there are 2 o 3 stores that sells phones sealed. You will notice because they don't have phones in their windows, they have only boxes. (There is a place called "NASA" and there is others like this). this is cheaper than option 1. There is no haggle in stores like this. 3- small shops, sells phones with the box opened: places like this you will never know if it is a fixed, refurbished or something else. If the price is too low (for example 4 time less than in Dtac) probably is a clone. They love to haggle. I don't recommend buying in places like this.

Well, I've bought in places like 1 and 2 and I didn't have a problem. This is a really good place to buy. I think this information is really useful because I almost buy a phone that dons't work in my country, but I don't know where to publish it.

Narai Phand
The Narai Phand has moved, so this shop is closed:

 * This shop offers handicraft products from the SUPPORT Foundation.

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 15:39, 9 September 2010 (EDT)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:21, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The Park Ventures Ecoplex.jpg

title: Talk:Bangkok/Siam Square


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Silom

Overhaul of eating and drinking needed
Personally, I think this article is seriously lacking in the Eat and Drink sections. Silom has dozens of great restaurants, yet we mention the Duke of Wellington as a recommended eatery?! If anything, it should be in the Drink section, along with the other pubs in the area (Molly Molone's, O'Reilys, The Barbican, etc.).

Also in the Drink section, Silom has far more than just Patpong and the gay areas, such as all the aforementioned pubs, wine bars such as V9 at The Sofitel, the clubs in the area (Park Bridge, The Met Bar, etc.) as well as the large beer garden at Suan Lum. I guess the strip of bars at Lang Suan should be mentioned here also? Almost a whole article's worth of bars and restaurants down there.

Anyway, I'll slowly chip away and start adding these, but would be good if others could also. Thanks! (WT-en) Dantilley 21:35, 5 February 2009 (EST)

 * Yes, it definitely could use improvement. I think the focus now is too much on Patpong and other sleazy areas. But I wouldn't know any good listings to add yet. Anyway, feel free to plunge forward! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:08, 2 March 2010 (EST)
 * Just seen it's been over a year since I wrote that! Will see if I can add a few ideas soon, it's still much needed I think.(WT-en) Dantilley 11:05, 8 March 2010 (EST)

removed reference to lucifer since has been shut down for months. 58.8.21.175 04:02, 7 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Thanks! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:28, 7 June 2011 (EDT)

Food Fusion
Robinson has closed, which I think means that Food Fusion also has closed:

 * A modern food court with a twist, with stalls offering Thai, Chinese, Italian, Japanese and Vietnamese food. On entry you receive a barcoded baton used to record your orders, and you pay the sum on exit.

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:10, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

Toby Jug
Not sure why The Toby Jug was added to the British Pubs section - it closed down years ago. I've removed it. (WT-en) Dantilley 06:34, 15 October 2010 (EDT)
 * Thanks! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 18:29, 31 May 2011 (EDT)

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) 10:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Vertigo Moon Bar Bangkok.jpg

 * Suspected copyright violation. I don't think we should enable that by uploading the photo locally. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:47, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bangkok/Silom


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Sukhumvit

hi. Someone deleted the gogo bars because of the sex tourism policy.

Can anyone explain where this is? One of the main reasons people visit Bangkok is to pay for sex, and even non-sex tourists would probably find it interesting to visit the gogo bars.

 * Hmm, I don't think our policy prevents listing go-go bars, but you may want to read it over. We aren't not interested in helping people in their quest to "pay for sex." Bangkok is an interesting problem because the sex trade spots have become a tourist site (regardless of whether this is a good or bad thing). Maybe we should take this to the Project:Sex tourism policy page before doing anything more... (WT-en) Majnoona 12:22, 8 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * Added back in, but now a little more discreetly under Drink. Nana's and Cowboy's bars aren't brothels -- it's entirely possible to go in and have a drink without paying for sex, although Patpong is a better place for those who just want to gawk. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:32, 14 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * I think that you put them back in a nice toned-down way-- no details, just that this area has those types of places. And, yes, a lot of tourists (middle-age couples, etc etc) do visit go-go bars just for a drink and a look-see. I think you gave enough info so at least folks wanting to avoid a gogo-style bar know where not to go... (WT-en) Majnoona 08:41, 15 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Ambience vs ambiance
Both spellings are correct, ambiance is just more Frenchy and pretentious. I don't care which one is chosen, but can't we at least be internally consistent in the same article? (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:34, 30 Jul 2004 (EDT)

New center?
Sorry, I don't get how Suvarnabhumi relates to Sukhumvit becoming the "new center" — in my opinion Sukhumvit already is, and has been ever since they built the Skytrain if not longer. For example, the crossing of Rama I and Ratchaprapop has been "the" place — think Times Square — to celebrate New Year ever since they build the WTC. (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:37, 18 August 2006 (EDT)

Times
...should be listed in AM/PM format, not 24-hour time. Please see Project:Attraction listings. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:16, 9 November 2006 (EST)

Ronnys New York Pizza - Italian?
Listed under Italian Restaurants there is "Ronnys New York Pizza", however the description clearly states that the Pizzas are New York style, and any Italian - along with many others - would agree that this is Italian food. I propose that this is moved to Other Restaurants section.

"Beverly Hills of Asia" ?
Quote from Page....Soi 55, better known as Thong Lo (Thonglor) has been described by the New York Times as the "Beverly Hills of Asia", Can anyone varify that this is the truth? I know some local that says it all the time but saying it alot does not mean it true. I've searched the NYT( as below) and find no word of it. Your Search:NYT Archive Since 1981 NYT Archive 1851-1980 Google/Web Multimedia NYC Guide Answers.com/Reference Advanced Date Range: 1981- 2007 Custom Date Range Your search for "Beverly Hills of Asia" in all fields returned 0 results.

 * Good Q. There's a lengthy article at  hyping Thonglor, but the Beverly Hills bit is absent. (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:02, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Yes I've read that, Thanks for the link, I have been to Beverly Hills and Thong lor.... not counting  starbucks, There is NO similarity between the two that I can see. Unless the quote is found, which I have looked extensively with out result, I'd like to ask, Am I allowed too delete the above quote? Thank-you.

 * Plunge forward! (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:36, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

Thanks Mate.

Big johnkok ?
Big johnkok, Thailand?, seemed like alot of Promotion Big Johns Food everywhere on this page. Plunged foward and made changes.

Latest edits
So the latest batch of edits by MarinaK include I have pretty mixed feelings about this. Now what? -- (WT-en) Colin 20:58, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
 * Remove of Thai script which could have been useful for ordering food
 * Removal of any Massage Parlor which is not completely and obviously on the up-and-up. And by obvious I mean "obvious to anyone sitting in North America" rather than "obvious to anyone who has been there."
 * Removal of stub listings. On the other hand, these appear to only occur in well-populated sections which already have enough entries.
 * Marina's usual plethora of good and useful text editing.

 * Gar. I manually restored most of the content. See Project:User ban nominations. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:13, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Could not find a Australian eatery named Big Johns where it was said to be so deleted it for accuracy.
Could not find a Australian eatery named Big Johns where it was said to be so deleted it for accuracy.

the Sports bar on Sukhumkvit soi 20 is called the "Sports Bar"
the Sports bar on Sukhumkvit soi 20 is called the "Sports Bar" NOT "Sports Bar and Big Johns Kitchen". Made the change for accuracy.

something missing?
A few things I was wondering about. Suk11? They can be assholes regarding policy, but why no mention? Bully's bar? Cheap Charlies? Soi 3.5 where all the arab restaurants? Nefertiti, Petra, Sabai Sabai, etc. Its a really interesting part of Bangkok (My personal favorite), Seems to be a lot missing... -ตะวัน

 * I'd say go ahead and plunge forward! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 16:19, 14 September 2010 (EDT)

Santika Club
I think this is the club described herein as having burned down. Please restore the listing if I'm wrong... (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:02, 31 December 2008 (EST)

 * Santika Ekamai (Sukhumvit Soi 63), just past Soi 9. Bangkok's hip hop club with occasional live music performances. Open until 02:00. No cover charge. Frequented by well-off Thais and university students. A bit pricey but worth the visit.

Deletions
An anon user recently deleted about half the restaurants here, without explanation. I've reverted, but someone who knows the area should check. (WT-en) Pashley

Pullman King Power Hotel

I removed the listing of The Pullman King Power Hotel as it's nowhere near Sukhumvit. Amari Watergate is also not really in the Sukhumvit area so I removed that too. To compensate for this, I've added The Westin and the Sheraton as two 5 star hotels which were left out. (WT-en) Dantilley 04:28, 1 February 2009 (EST)

 * Please do not remove listings without figuring out where they should go first. Sukhumvit is defined here as region 1, which covers everything up to and including Phetchaburi.  I've restored Pullman under Bangkok/Phayonyothin, which isn't quite right either though... (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:46, 2 February 2009 (EST)

 * Yes that is right, Pullman should be under Bangkok/Phayonyothin. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 20:51, 7 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Bangkok/Sukhumvit


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Thonburi

Photo of Peninsula Hotel
I would normally delete such a photo as an advertising photo, but it's a well-composed photo and the view is arguably of some interest. What do you all think? On balance, I consider this a slippery slope and think the wisest course of action would be to delete, but one possible alternative is to take out the name of the hotel from the photo and just call it "View of a Thonburi hotel." (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:47, 17 November 2011 (EST)

 * I added this image. The Peninsula is not just "a hotel", it is one of the most luxury hotels of the world, it is very famous and might even be considered a landmark. Many travellers hop on the Peninsula's free cross-ferry to have a drink or bite at one of their cafes. It's not just for lodging. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 11:12, 17 November 2011 (EST)

 * Thanks for the explanation, and I'm glad I didn't act rashly but asked for feedback. All the best, (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:37, 17 November 2011 (EST)

title: Talk:Bangkok/Thonburi


text:
Talk:Bangkok/Yaowarat and Phahurat

Bangkok/Yaowarat and Pahurat Star Discussion
I've put effort in this article to try to make it qualify for star status. It must be the best guide on this area, far better than the available commercial guides. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:51, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Very close - I think this is a very solid nomination. The info is good, the map is great, and there seems to be a solid number of listings. But there are a few small things which stop me from giving a full vote of support - forgive the nitpicking, but it's necessary:
 * 1) The first, and really the most important one in my mind, is that many of the listings lack a proper amount of address info, just the street (I'll use Wat Chakrawat as an example, but there are others). I understand that a formal address may not exist (and even if it did, it might not be very useful in such a complex district), but surely there could be more info. Perhaps an intersection, or which two streets the place lies between? Something to give me a better idea of exactly where it's located.
 * 2) Purely aesthetic, but when I opened the article I was struck by the solid wall of text in the introduction. Could we divide that into a couple more paragraphs? Just so it doesn't look so intimidating...
 * 3) Two budget eat listings, Yen Ta Fo Je Hieng and Samrat, lack prices. Also, could we have one of those price range boxes in the Eat section, like the one you have in Sleep?
 * 4) Texas Hotel lacks contact info and prices. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 17:43, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Thanks for your input! Let me go at this case by case:
 * I've tried to add descriptions to some of the listings, if you're still unsatisfied, let me know which listings you'd like to be improved. Getting addresses is really a headache, I've really tried my best to find any I can, so descriptions will have to suffice (especially with the temples).
 * I moved a part of the introduction to "Understand" to make it feel a bit less intimidating. I hope that's okay.
 * I've added prices to the 2 restaurants and added the price range box.
 * I removed the Texas Hotel as it was added by someone else, but as far as I know it, I don't think its a great add anyway (and I cannot find contact details anywhere). --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:48, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Much better! I will support now! (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 20:07, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

 * A few suggestions/questions
 * The intro appears almost only to talk about Yaowarat and not about Pahurat. Maybe one or two sentences about Pahurat could be added
 * History: Teochew is the old spelling, should be replaced by Chaozhou
 * It appears a bit random whether the name of listings are written in Thai as well. It could be considered to add the Thai name for more listings
 * Are there no splurge restaurants in the district?
 * There must be somewhere in the district where you can have a drink or a beer?
 * Are there no splurge hotels in the district?, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 02:30, 18 July 2010 (EDT)

 * I'm with Claus on the consistency in Thai names, I know it's tricky since I tried searching for a few of them to have them added, with little luck - but if it all possible, that would be nice. One or two real drink listings would certainly be nice too. But none of those are really show stoppers if it isn't possible to add them, and there is already prose in the drink section... Oh, and nice work! --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 09:40, 18 July 2010 (EDT)

 * 1) I've added a sentence about Pahurat in there (but it generally is the less visited and less interesting neighborhood of the two)
 * 2) Changed it to Chaozhou
 * 3) You're right that it seems a bit random. The idea I followed is: add it where I can find it. I don't speak Thai so for me its impossible to write it. For the ones listed, I got them from Google or Wikipedia. There's two ways to fix this: 1. get a Thai speaker to add them, or 2. remove them all. Or follow the path I did, Hiroshima also does not have all listings with Japanese characters.
 * 4) There are no splurge restaurants, it is generally a quite "amateurish" neighborhood (as many other Chinatowns around the world)
 * 5) I've roamed around a lot there, but they don't have bars in the traditional sense as most Westerners know it. That's why I added the coffee joints for some drinks, I wouldn't know what else to add there. I did elaborate a bit about Yaowarat's hawker stalls as that's where most people just get some iced chocolate or something.
 * 6) Splurge hotels have the same explanation as splurge eateries — this is not a fancy district, so they don't exist. For that, people go to Sukhumvit or Silom.

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 10:41, 18 July 2010 (EDT)

 * For the Hiroshima article, it was agreed that the attractions in the "See" section should list the Japanese names and that it would be a good idea to do this for all foreign scripts. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:41, 21 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Well, I've spend the whole weekend finding my Thai friends and trying to get the Thai words for the attractions. Even many Thais have no idea how to write many of them, but I have managed to find all of the See section except for Wat Ga Buang Kim -- but this temple is so unbelievably small and unknown, the only way to find it is if I go back there to ask. I hope its okay now with the Thai scripts. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:49, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Support. It's a fantastic article, with a beautiful map, and I'll enjoy turning Thailand pink on the map. I haven't yet had an opportunity to give it a close read, but will try to remember to do so—even after starring. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:11, 14 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Support It's an excellent article and it paves the road for the rest of Bangkok. (WT-en) jan 11:46, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Support Looks good to me. (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 08:22, 5 September 2010 (EDT)

It is now over a month since the last comment, and there don't seem to be any unresolved problems. Go ahead and clap on the Star, Globe-trotter. -- (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 03:53, 14 October 2010 (EDT)

Result: Promoted. --(WT-en) globe-trotter

title: Talk:Bangkok/Yaowarat and Phahurat


text:
Talk:Bangkok to Ho Chi Minh City overland

The Overland from Singapore to Shanghai itinerary already covers the Bangkok-HCMC section, why do we need to keep this separate? (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:30, 7 May 2006 (EDT)

BKK-Saigon is a completely different journey than Singapore-Shanghai, and starts in Bangkok. In case of overlap you are free to link to this itinerary or otherwise incorporate the content into yours. (WT-en) Piroco 18:49, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Another possibility would be template inclusion, although my guess is that this part of the journey would be covered in more detail in its own article than in the larger one.

 * I see a number of reasons to keep this as a separate article. Level of detail is one. Also, I think that Bangkok is an air hub for the region, and itineraries that start and end there are likely to be useful.

 * Mostly I think that overlap in itineraries is less of a problem than overlap in the destination guides. I think that itineraries are less well-defined than our destination guides, and we need to do some experimentation with them. Let's have the itinerary garden grow a little more before we prune it back too much. --(WT-en) Evan 19:38, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Never taken this trip, and found this informative.

VFD discussion
This article engendered a particularly long discussion on the Project:Votes for deletion page, which is reproduced below. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 11:46, 27 May 2006 (EDT)

Overlaps with Overland from Singapore to Shanghai. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:02, 10 May 2006 (EDT) Note: I've changed my mind and am now in favor of keeping this. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:22, 18 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Keep. I think we need to work out what to do for itineraries that overlap, but I don't think that deleting the shortest segments is the answer. --(WT-en) Evan 22:18, 10 May 2006 (EDT)
 * If the shorter segment is more intensive or somehow covers matters from a different viewpoint, I would agree. For example, a longer journey might be accomplished in fewer days and pick fewer sights to see.  In the absence of an explaination like that, I'm leaning toward merge and delete. -- (WT-en) Colin
 * Isn't Project:Itineraries a better place to discuss this? I think the nature of itineraries, as we have them mapped out, makes them very likely to have overlapping and duplicate information. For example, we have itineraries that cover the same area but with different time periods. I also think that for someone who's going from Bangkok to Saigon, Overland from Singapore to Shanghai has a lot of information they don't need, and probably leaves out some information they may want. I think dupes in itineraries are OK, since mostly they should link out to destination guides for detailed information. Finally, I think that some of the non-destination-guide content like travel topics and itineraries need more in the way of growth, not pruning. Let's wait until having too many itineraries is a problem before we start hacking out duplicates. --(WT-en) Evan 19:38, 11 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. Singapore to Shanghai is a completely different itinerary. 84.9.98.130 18:40, 11 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Could you please elaborate on this? On the face of it this new itinary is completely covered in the prior article.  Why do you think we need a separate article for this segment rather than just incorporating this content into the older article? -- (WT-en) Colin 19:11, 11 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Yeah, this is my question too. I'm OK with different itineraries that cover different routes, but having different pages for exactly the same route just seems redundant.  Would it be an acceptable compromise to chop up Singapore-Shanghai into Singapore-Bangkok, Bangkok-HCMC, HCMC-Shanghai legs? (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:23, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Delete. Move some of the information into Overland from Singapore to Shanghai. Some of the more specific stuff can go in Cambodia or the cities. (WT-en) Pashley 21:04, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

 * I think the suggestion of chopping up Singapore-Shangai into Singapore-BKK, BKK-HCMC and HCMC-Shanghai and then incorporating the two itineraries we now have into those three is the best suggestion! It solves both the overlap problem and the problem of irrelevance of a singapore-shanghai itinerary for someone travelling out of Bangkok. (WT-en) Piroco 12:25, 13 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Keep. The shorter segment is in fact more intensive and matters more from a different viewpoint, so Colin's test is fulfilled, I think. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 13:45, 13 May 2006 (EDT)

 * I think not. This not only overlaps the Singapore-Shanghai intinerary, it also covers almost exactly the same ground as One month in Southeast Asia. (WT-en) Pashley 20:44, 13 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Have a look at how it's been organized now. I've followed up on Jpatokal's suggestion to create singapore-bkk, bkk-hcmc and hcmc-shanghai, that should suit everybody's needs. Overlap is unavoidable, both with city guides and with other suggested itineraries. I don't think the way around it is to delete and merge as much as possible. Let the hundred flowers blossom. (WT-en) Piroco 14:53, 14 May 2006 (EDT)

 * I have looked and do not like the "solution". As I see it, One month in Southeast Asia plus the various city and country entries cover everything that's in Bangkok-HCMC. Travelling Bangkok-HCMC is just part of wandering around SE Asia; there is no reason to have it as a separate itinerary. S'pore-Shanghai, on the other hand, is long enough to be interesting. I'm tempted to restore it to its earlier form, but will await comment and perhaps consensus. (WT-en) Pashley 10:00, 16 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Am I the only one getting a feeling this is turning into some kind of turf war? Quite frankly a bit tired of spending my time on an unproductive debate over structure, it doesn't feel very constructive to have a never ending debate about where to put stuff, and I'm not really sure it is the most important thing we should be worried about either. Pashley's arguments are nonsensical; why merge BKK-HCMC into the One month in Southeast Asia which is, at this point, only a stub? Why not rather link to a more extensive itinerary from the list of suggestions on the one month-article? Why keep singapore-shanghai, when the route covered is more accessible to more people if it's split up, but will be difficult to find if we keep it as it was? If you only want to travel one leg of it, you're not likely to look at a singapore-shanghai article if where you want to go is bangkok to siem reap. Why are long itineraries 'more interesting' than shorter ones? Well, I guess it's a view of sorts, but it certainly isn't very well founded. Sorry, I don't get it --- are we in some kind of turf war or are we still trying to make a travel site?  I need to be reminded. (WT-en) Piroco 00:09, 18 May 2006 (EDT)
 * You're stumbled onto a little gray area in Wikivoyage's policies, so what you're seeing now is people trying to figure out how we should handle not just this, but future cases as well. The correct thing to do, though, is to keep the article and continue the policy discussion on Project:Itineraries. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:22, 18 May 2006 (EDT)
 * What gave me the feeling of a turf war, and irritated me fairly severely, was the retaliatory vfd on S'pore to Shanghai, followed by splitting it up before any consensus had been reached. Possibly parts of my response were over-reaction. Any further discussion on Project:Itineraries. (WT-en) Pashley 02:23, 21 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Keep. To make the consensus clear, I've changed my mind too. This intinerary is clearly a good contribution, and we should keep it. We do have some issues to sort out — the general problem of intinerary overlap, whether splitting S'pore to Shanghai was actually a good idea, whether some stuff currently in this itinerary should be in destination articles — but only Jpatokal and I ever advocated deleting this one, so now that we've both rethought that, there's consensus. (WT-en) Pashley 11:40, 27 May 2006 (EDT)


text:
Talk:Bangkok To saigon overland

Bangkok To saigon overland
This is just a redirect and there's another at Bangkok to Saigon overland. (WT-en) Pashley 13:02, 5 July 2007 (EDT) I agree. Keep as redirect. (WT-en) WindHorse 00:21, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Delete no need to keep duplications. (WT-en) WindHorse 23:55, 7 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Keep. Yes there is no need to keep duplications, but neither is there any reason to delete them. There is also the possibility that useless redirects will boost hits for Wikivoyage's articles. ''Keep per current deletion policy. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:15, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Looks like a clear keep (as redirect) to me. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:25, 14 July 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Bangkok To saigon overland


text:
Talk:Bangladesh

Random info
For any kind of information you can write to Bangladesh Travel Helpers Forum (BTHF). This organization helps the tourists through giving information & dont take any money for this. You can also book tickets in advance by BTHF. Their e-mail address is : bthf123@gmail.com

Maps
The gov't website has a lot of maps that could be useful for Wiki map-makers... (WT-en) Cacahuate 00:21, 4 December 2006 (EST)

Divisions
So I've now created division pages since I have a better sense of what needs a page and doesn't... so far Chittagong Division, Rajshahi Division, Khulna Division and Sylhet Division seem like they have multiple destinations and can make a good page...

Dhaka Division and Barisal Division don't seem to have much else going on aside from the capital cities and things that can be done as day trips from them, so I've linked them direct to the city pages, and any day trips can go in the 'see' or 'get out' sections on the city pages. (WT-en) Cacahuate 06:25, 5 December 2006 (EST)

Gopalgonj

 * Gopalgonj - Birthplace of the father of the nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

I moved this out of 'cities', not much info on it, can't find it on a map, nor is it included in my LP guide... if someone knows which 'division' it's in, please add it to that page, but I don't think it belongs in the list of 9 cities on the front Bangladesh page... (WT-en) Cacahuate 12:15, 17 January 2007 (EST)

 * It's near Dhaka, adding it there... (WT-en) Cacahuate 12:25, 17 January 2007 (EST)

Spin?
The article currently makes scenic, friendly, wonderful, fish-lover's Bangladesh sound like the greatest thing since sliced bread. Most people who've actually been there tell me it's filthy, congested, dangerous, and has few attractions. Could somebody who knows the score -- calling a French peanut -- fix this up? (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:18, 18 January 2007 (EST)

 * Errr, read a little closer, I'm doing my best not to interject too many of my negative feelings since some are personal, but trying to reflect the actual state of the country... I think the articles starting to do that pretty well...

 * Few attractions yes, the cities (especially Dhaka and Chittagong) are absolutely filthy and polluted. Dangerous? Not so much, unless you go hartal-crashing, but it didn't feel anymore so than India. Scenic? It does have some nice scenery, nice being the keyword.

 * The people are indeed some of the friendliest on earth, too much so for me, but I'm trying not to interject to much negativity into the article since what I found wrong with the country were more personal issues that might not bother others as much.

 * The food is indeed very good most of the time, as long as you like fish and rice. note the 'meatless' chicken comment...

 * Check out the understand sections for Cox's Bazar and Chittagong - I've still got a lot more to do for Dhaka, so that article will reflect a more accurate tone once I get there...

 * I can certainly add more complaints if that's what people want, I've got a lot of them, but I'm not sure that's what we really want... (WT-en) Cacahuate 08:47, 18 January 2007 (EST)

 * The articles are looking great, but to address the concerns above, I wonder whether the Dhaka article might sound a little more accurate/genuine if the city's dire poverty and choking pollution were given a mentioned in the 'Understand' section. Personally, I like Dhaka, and I've always had a great time there, but the sparkling capital of an Asian tiger it is most definitely is not. What does our French peanut friend think? (WT-en) WindHorse 12:01, 18 January 2007 (EST)

 * I totally agree about Dhaka... I haven't really gotten my teeth into that article yet other than cleaning up the prior existing info, as I've been focusing on others, but will get around to it soon... got lots of notes on it... retiring for the night now! P.S., if you're referring to me, I'm more of a spanish peanut, we Americans have a shaky history with them Franches... (WT-en) Cacahuate 12:34, 18 January 2007 (EST)
 * Thanks - Actually, I'd like to help, but it has just been too long since I was last in Dhaka to make a reliable and up-to-date contribution. Ah, yes, Cacahuate is Spanish. Lo siento, amigo! (WT-en) WindHorse 23:18, 18 January 2007 (EST)

 * Well, if you think of something please do! It's probably not necessary at this time, but do you think at some point we should split Dhaka up into districts? Dhaka/Old Dhaka, Dhaka/Central Dhaka, Dhaka/Gulshan (also including Benoni in Gulshan)? At the very least we'll have to do separate maps for these 3 areas I think... (WT-en) Cacahuate 00:03, 19 January 2007 (EST)
 * I guess at some point all the mega-cities, which Dhaka certainly qualifies, will need to be divided into districts. The ones you suggest for Dhaka sound correct to me. (WT-en) WindHorse 01:57, 19 January 2007 (EST)

 * Megacities are defined by volume of tourist attractions, not sheer size. Delhi's still a normal 'big city' (although it's starting to be a candidate for districting) and it's way larger in size and tourist volume than Dhaka... (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:31, 19 January 2007 (EST)

 * Good point, won't create those then anytime soon... if ever... (WT-en) Cacahuate 04:09, 19 January 2007 (EST)

Grameen Phone
Sorry anonymous Grameen Phone deleter, but I'm pretty sure they're still in business. If somethings changed or you care to comment, do so here... – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 23:54, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Visa section
Not sure that the visa section is very authoratative. The advice "better to just pay the overstay fee of Tk 200/day for up to 15 days" is pretty poor. A somewhat common question when filling out visa applications for other countries, applying for immigration status, etc. is 'Have you ever overstayed a visa in any country'. It would be pretty bad to knowingly set yourself up for a situation where you have to choose between lying on that form or telling them you have.

Also your passport will have a record of the overstay -- something that consular or immigration officials in other countries may notice. Its rare that they look for that, but if they do, they'll certainly think twice about granting you a visa or entry.

Also, the "extortionate Rs 5000 (~$110) for American citizens" is a little harsh. Countries often set visa rates based on the principle of reciprocity. An American tourist visa costs about the same for Bangladeshi citizens. I propose removing the "extortionate" adjective. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 138.88.62.116 (talk • contribs)

 * I'm the author of both of those comments, and feel that both of them are very true and relevant to the article. I've applied for about 20 visas in the last 2 years and don't ever recall having to answer the "have you overstayed?" question. And as you say above, it's highly unlikely that anyone's going to take time to do the math and figure out if you were a few days late.

 * Regarding the "extortionate" comment... I'm well aware that visa costs are often based on reciprocity, but sometimes it just doesn't make sense. The US and Bangladesh are at opposite ends of the spectrum in pretty much every aspect. Bangladesh needs tourists. The US doesn't. If the US relaxed it's visa costs and restrictions we'd get flooded with immigrants... sticking with Bangladesh as an example, I would guess that 80% of the entire country would move to the US if given the opportunity. But all that aside, I find extortionate to be a very appropriate word, because that's exactly what I felt was happening... it wasn't about the politics of visa costs, it was simply an attempt to extort has much as possible. Did I mention that the $110 was for FIFTEEN DAYS???? To visit one of the poorest, and by most accounts, least appealing countries in the world? And that in order to extend the visa at all beyond the 15 days costs another $110? Do you have a better word to describe that? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 02:24, 21 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Very few Americans/Europeans visit Bangladesh (excluding dual citizens) and tourism is not a high priority. This policy may be classified as idiotic (my opinion), but it's the reality.  Visa fees are typically based on a reciprocity fee schedule.  Most visitors in Bangladesh are Indians, but they are not charged as much due to SAARC agreements.  I agree that visiting this country is unappealing unless ones has family or business, but their policy is consistent with international practices.  America did have free visa applications in the past (1990s): the amount of people applying for visas was actually less than it is today.  Fees were introduced to cover costs - an appropriate policy even for a poor nation.  So, the word that should be used is "reciprocity." If the US removed visa fees for Bangladeshi citizen's they would probably reciprocate. No offense intended to anyone. rgds, rms.

 * What costs does Bangladesh need to cover that any other country doesn't? Anyway, I trust you've read my rant above, I already covered it pretty much. Anyhow, let's compromise... how about "hefty"... surely you don't disagree with that? Consider Pakistan, who also have a similar "reciprocal" visa fee... however you get at least 30 days for that, and can extend it a couple times for free once inside the country (and fairly easily at that). Sorry to fight so hard on this, but the visa situation in BD left a really bad taste in my mouth, and I've applied for a lot of visas. Also please note that the text we're discussing is regarding the Kolkata Consulate, where a maximum of 15 days are given (longer visas are issued through some other embassies, for the same cost); that's a large part of why I consider it extortionate and not just relatively expensive – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 19:20, 24 October 2007 (EDT)

 * They have the same costs as any other country that charges fees. I've had several dealings with the Bangladeshi government, and believe me this was not extortion - just sheer incompetence.  Extortion is when they make you pay a bribe before accepting your income tax check (not a joke). I think you've picked a good compromise with the word "hefty".  If you're carrying an American passport consider yourself blessed that most countries won't even require a visa - something few Asians enjoy.  Best wishes.  rms

Hacking murders of secularist bloggers
Should these be mentioned somewhere, such as "Stay safe"? This has not affected foreigners, and a foreigner would probably have to try hard to get caught up in such crimes. What do you think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I do not think it is necessary to mention in the stay safe. Because it is a big incident but it is not a regular event. If someone want to visit Bangladesh it is ok not to be aware of this type of incident. --nasir khan saikat 12:43, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and thanks for your reply. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:59, 22 May 2015 (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) 05:17, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * They're both good. Can one be used for another article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * We can use the new one. But it would be better if you mirror the image before using this image. otherwise the men on the boat will the covered by the title of the article 'Bangladesh'. Hebrew is a right to left language and the image was perfect. --nasir khan saikat 06:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Mirroring would be better indeed. However, for Bangladesh as a country I prefer the old banner. It has a mystical quality, which is more inviting to me than then second one. JuliasTravels (talk) 13:00, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Well, the proposed banner does in fact have a slice of life for a change :) I'm neutral. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:18, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Both good, slight #1 Syced (talk) 09:16, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

 * I created the first banner, so may be a little biased. But the first is a little more artistic, with deep shades of green and misty mountains. The proposed one is just another standard photo of a boat in the water. I've also noticed that another slightly artistic banner I had for Dhaka, highlighting the city's famous rickshaws, has also been removed and replaced without discussion. James A ▪ talk 09:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

 * I like that banner much better than the current Dhaka banner and would vote for it to be restored. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * That makes three of us already then, so I went ahead and changed it back. I left a note on the talk page. JuliasTravels (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

1st / old 1 seems better to me please don't change. 27.147.203.20 14:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * the old 1 is better;both mountain & river lover will be attracted to BD, 2nd pic doesn't seems good to me :/ --Promise Prompri (talk) 05:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Mymensingh Division
Hi, everyone. Bangladesh has has an 8th division since 2015. Would someone like to update the map? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

 * I've got the files somewhere on my computer from when I updated the map to include the at-the-time new Rangpur Division. If anyone volunteers to do it, I can send the files, or else I'll probably get around to it sooner or later. James A ▪ talk 21:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, it should be noted that the government has plans to further subdivide and create even more regions (Comilla and Faridpur last I heard). So where do we draw the line? That would overall create 10 top-level regions. Much larger neighbouring countries India and Myanmar both have 6 top-level regions. It would need to be discussed in more detail, but maybe the best option would be to use the eventual 10 divisions, with no further sub-regions within these. So the overall hierarchy would be something like 'Bangladesh > Comilla Divison > Comilla'. James A ▪ talk 21:20, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see any reason for us to respect the regional level below divisions. The only level below the division level should be cities and other bottom-level articles such as national parks. I don't think 10 divisions would be too many to deal with, but if necessary or most useful, they could be grouped into larger regions by direction (north-east, south-west, what have you). Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

A town listed in "Other destinations"
"Other destinations" are supposed to be destinations other than cities (or towns, villages, et al.), such as national parks, wildlife preserves and large ruins. So I move this town's listing here for discussion:

 * Rangamati- To take the colorful tribal experience of Bangladesh.

Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

 * Here's another, also moved from that section:

 * Bogra- One of the oldest towns in northern Bangladesh.

 * Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Bangladeshi taka
Which symbol should be used -- ৳ or Tk? Ground Zero (talk) 02:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Laotian and Thai precedent would indicate perhaps we should use "100 taka" rather than either of the symbols you suggest. Powers (talk) 13:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I've scanned the main cities and other destinations articles featured on Bangladesh. Tk 100, 100 tk and TK100 are by far the most common formats, with Tk 100 being the most common of those. 100 taka and 100 Taka appear in one listing in the Cox's Bazar article, but the rest of the article uses "Tk". ৳100 appears in Chittagong, where it has been added by, who works for the Wikimedia Bangladesh Foundation. It was his edits that led me to raise this question. I am pinging him for his input. Changing the policy to "taka" would seem to be putting it out of alignment with the notations contributors are actually using. I'm not sure I see the benefit of doing that, although I understand the precedent you cite. Ground Zero (talk)
 * Now here's strange thing... On my setup (Ubuntu, Firefox) the symbol is displayed in editing mode, but not in "view article" mode. Does anybody else have a similar problem? Edited to add: even copying the weird box symbol I get in "read" mode into edit mode gives me: ৳ which in "edit mode" I can read without a problem... Edited again to add: And now that  ৳ is displayed correctly in "view page" mode while the others are still boxes. What's going on here? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Weirdness in the interaction among fonts, operating systems, browsers, and Unicode is very common, which is a major reason to avoid relatively obscure currency symbols. Sometimes it's tempting to use $, €, £, and ¥ and leave everything else to abbreviations.  Powers (talk) 19:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The most commonly used symbol for the Bangladeshi taka is "৳" and "Tk". As I have seen most US related articles using dollar sign $. However, if there any displaying problem in different browsers, then it would be better to write "Tk". ~ Moheen  (keep talking) 21:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone have other views, or should we take Moheen's advice on this, i.e., to use "Tk" since there seem to be problems with displaying "৳"? Ground Zero (talk) 21:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree, I also have display problems (Ubuntu, Firefox), in the discussion above I see some of the symbol displayed correctly and some not, so really not sure what's going on here. Going for "Tk" might be safer. Then of course this might only be a problem for users of obscure operating systems. Drat70 (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Floods?
CNN says A third of Bangladesh under water as flood devastation widens. I think we should add a warning but am not doing it myself because I do not know the area or any of the details. Pashley (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

New page banner candidates
[EDIT] While the current banner has a great motif, the resolution is too low. Here are some new banners. Which do you prefer? /Yvwv (talk) 20:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Possibly, the banner of South Asia could be brought up for discussion. /Yvwv (talk) 20:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the swamp forest, because it's watery, is a little more representative of Bangladesh than Konglak Hill, so since those are the two best pictures, I think the swamp forest wins by a nose. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * New candidate. Would any of those pictures do for South Asia? /Yvwv (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The new candidate should be a banner for something. But why do you want to change the banner for South Asia? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * IMO, Asia has too many mountain banners. Banners with lush nature, buildings and/or people would be preferrable to represent South Asia. /Yvwv (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Out of the suggested banners, I liked Khagrachari most from a purely photographical standpoint, but it could be anywhere with a beautiful scenery in the world. Sundarbans looks more specific to Bangladesh, but the photo quality is low and the background is too hazy. The rice field is generic to all South Asia (and if the farmer wasn't visible, to much of Asia). So I think Ratargul seems optimal in its representativeness for the country (looks close enough to a mangrove forest even if it isn't) as well as in the picture quality. Vidimian (talk) 00:26, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I have a preference for 4, followed by number 5 --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Flags in "Get in"
Do we want little flags of countries whose citizens don't require visas for stays of up to 90 days? I think we don't, and just the country names are sufficient, but I don't recall any discussion of this on any policy page. I don't think these kinds of edits should be made without discussion someplace like Wikivoyage talk:Image policy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:41, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think they make it easier to get the information at all. They add clutter are not decipherable on a mobile device. Ground Zero (talk) 04:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * ARR8, would you like to make an argument in favor before we revert your edit? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:24, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I brought this up in the Pub a while ago, outlining this and asking for feedback, and no one objected at the time. I would have done things differently now that I have a better understanding of how consensus and status quo bias works here, but, regardless, I'd already made this change on a few pages and assumed people were at worst indifferent. My offer in the pub still stands, and I'm willing to remove these everywhere I've added them if that's preferred. ARR8 (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm looking at the thread. Only AndreCarrotflower expressed any degree of approval. You had, if anything, skepticism if not a consensus against. The Pub, in any case, is not a place to make policy decisions, but instead a place where you can link a discussion elsewhere on a change of policy or start one there and then continue it on an appropriate policy page's talk page. But how you interpreted all the skepticism in that thread to amount to a lack of objection, I don't understand. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:28, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I posted a reply there. Your intentions are wonderful; just don't get ahead of consensus too much. Major changes in appearance that can affect numerous pages need more than a few people's discussion. You should also post to Requests for comment if you start a thread on Wikivoyage talk:Image policy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that now. When I'd posted that, I'd interpreted the lack of anyone saying "No, don't do it" as permission to go ahead on a trial basis. Again, how consensus works around here was explained to me some time ago (by User:AndreCarrotflower), but this discussion predates that. ARR8 (talk) 16:49, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and reverted all uses of this. And, of course, thanks for the explanations/discussion. ARR8 (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Determining where Plunge forward applies vs. where Consensus applies is more of an art than a science. If there's a way to make policy more clear, we should do so. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate that. It's definitely not intuitive, at least for me. ARR8 (talk) 17:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't think policy here is too complicated; I've learned a lot by experience. The harder parts are formatting and capitalization in listing templates. And also learning about how discussions work on Wikivoyage. I was originally on Wikipedia, but discussions are really not the same there; here, many discussions include almost every active user on the site. Wikipedia is very different. Anyway, I didn't do enough on Wikipedia or understand it enough to participate in discussions, so even when I got to Wikivoyage I found things fairly new. I understood the basics of editing, but not much beyond that. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 17:27, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * ARR8, thanks for having a good attitude about this. I'm glad to have you around, because we should never want to get into a complacent mindset and feel like "because it's always been done that way" is a sufficient argument against all types of change (though at the same time, change for its own sake isn't normally the nature of Wikis). Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Far be it from me to advocate for change for its own sake. Actually, as time goes on, the more I appreciate the status quo bias here - it seems to work with a community as engaged as this one is. Hopefully, we can revisit the topic of flag links at some point in the future. ARR8 (talk) 19:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Chattogram montage 42.jpg
 * ✅ at Wikidata ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 17:05, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Currency, time and spelling conventions
Below is a proposed infobox to let readers know which formatting conventions to use in Wikivoyage articles. Do you agree with these proposals? If you have direct knowledge of what is most commonly used in the country, please let us know. Ground Zero (talk) 12:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved to the top of this page. Ground Zero (talk) 04:52, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * on Talk:Iraq someone claims that Bangladesh uses the 12 hour clock more (not surprised since most places with the legacy of the British or the US tend to use 12 more, with some exceptions). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That could be the case, but it would be good if they would present some evidence. Ground Zero (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Also see this. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable to me. Ground Zero (talk) 01:11, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Current hierarchy of Bangladesh does not look good
While dividing Bangladesh into divisions might make sense in terms of geographical size, I don't think so in terms of travel content. Mymensingh Division has the lowest number of bluelinked destinations (only one), while Chittagong Division has the highest number of bluelinked destinations (13). Therefore, we should group certain divisions into regions and divide Bangladesh like the following: Although I generally don't contribute on travel content in other countries, I thought I would do it, at least with the geographical hierarchy. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:31, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Central Bangladesh (Dhaka Division)
 * Northern Bangladesh (Rangpur Division and Rajshahi Division)
 * North-Eastern Bangladesh (Mymensingh Division and Sylhet Division)
 * Southern Bangladesh (Khulna Division and Barisal Division)
 * South-Eastern Bangladesh (Chittagong Division)

 * . Given how there are so few bluelinked destinations (I'm not surprised, though. Bangladesh isn't really a thriving tourist destination), Bangladesh doesn't need that many regions, and we certainly don't need region articles with only one bluelink. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 00:28, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Since enough days are passed and no there are no comments after this, I'll just plunge forward and group some of the divisions. However, I won't change the names of Dhaka Division and Chittagong Division. If someone does an undo to my edits, I will invite them to this talk page. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 11:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bangladesh


text:
Talk:Bangor (Wales)

drink subheadings
are we happy with the sub-headings in the drink section, or should they be scrapped? (WT-en) ::: Cacahuate 06:54, 1 February 2007 (EST)

TO DO

 * add more contact details for some of the drink listings

 * fill in the "get around" section - cabs, walking?

 * map

(WT-en) ::: Cacahuate 07:19, 1 February 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Bangor (Wales)


text:
Talk:Bangor (Washington)

Vote for deletion
This article was nominated for deletion. Discussion below.

Bangor (Washington)

 * Delete. Bangor is a closed military base, not a city of its own, and cannot be visited.  It certainly fails the "can you sleep there" test for everyone but military personnel on orders.  -- (WT-en) D. Guillaime 12:26, 8 February 2012 (EST)
 * It's too bad; it's a nice little article. =(  It sounds like military families might have reason to visit, is there any way we can justify keeping it?  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:52, 8 February 2012 (EST)
 * Delete. The description reads like every U.S. Navy base anywhere. Of course there's a Navy Exchange, a commissary, and several fast food chains. Most of the article's real content is just a description of how to get in and around. And as pointed out, it is only relevant to Navy personnel and families. -- (WT-en) BigPeteB 09:35, 10 February 2012 (EST)
 * Keep. There is no justification for deleting it. We have articles on other military-only areas such as Wake Island and on areas such as Mecca where travel is restricted to Muslims. (WT-en) Pashley 20:18, 12 February 2012 (EST)
 * See also Project:Votes_for_deletion/September_2007 and Wikivoyage_talk:Votes_for_deletion (WT-en) Pashley 20:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
 * I wouldn't consider a military base equivalent to a good-sized island or city. It's like giving a college campus its own article -- even if it were open to the public, I don't think it would pass the wiaa criteria.  -- (WT-en) D. Guillaime 21:52, 21 February 2012 (EST)
 * Keep-ish. I don't know this base well enough to understand if it's large enough to warrant an article (if not change my vote to a merge), but the point has been made in the past that some Wikivoyage articles might have a smaller, more specific audience than normal travel books, and that audience might include service members, scientific expeditions, or just people who want to read about a place they can't actually go to in person - see Wake Island for one existing example.  If this base really is a small town that is open to military personnel only then it probably doesn't hurt to keep it around. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:28, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

 * Redirect On Wikivoyage policy grounds I think Bangor lacks what it takes to be an article. If you washed up at Wake Island and said "Hi, I'm not sure I Understand what made me Get in here but I'd like a somewhere to Sleep and something to Eat (subsection Budget)", there's a chance you'd surprise the military personnel (or appeal to their compassion) enough to get them. At Bangor, they'd just say "Sod off to Poulsbo".

 * I agree with D. Guillaime in that Bangor has as much interest as a college campus, which I guess makes it worth mentioning breifly. The presence of a TRIDENT submarine base may be interesting to note in the Kitsap Peninsula article but "submarine spotting" would be an individual "Do" entry rather than needing a whole article. The what is an article? policy states that information about attractions, sites, and events should always be initially placed into the article for the place they're located in, and only when that information becomes large and complex should a new article be considered, which is how I think the base should be categorized.

 * On a practical note: anyone with business on the base will be unlikely looking to Wikivoyage for help to get around the base and anyone looking at Wikivoyage will be unlikely to find the article useful or interesting. Wake Island is wierd and quirky and hence interesting. There's nothing particularly notable about a run of the mill navel base. Even | Kitsap's own tourism website can't manage anything helpful to say about the base from a tourism perspective.(WT-en) Travelpleb 06:03, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

 * This one is a more tough call than usual between keep and redirect (but it definitely should be redirected, rather than deleted). I'll hop off the fence to help close the entry, though, and go redirect per Travelpleb. It looks like the bigger problem here, though, is that Kitsap Peninsula is heavily over divided into little hamlets, which would be better amalgamated into bottom-level region articles. This makes it harder to see where to where this content should be merged and/or redirected. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:37, 10 April 2012 (EDT)

 * I said keep above, but I'd be happy with a redirect as well. (WT-en) Pashley 21:07, 14 April 2012 (EDT)

 * I'm going to Redirect this to Kitsap Peninsula and add a couple of lines in that article about it unless there's any objections. I'll leave sorting out the regional hierarchy to someone who knows that part of the world. (WT-en) Travelpleb 07:06, 2 May 2012 (EDT)
 * Kitsap Peninsula now has this line in its list of cities:

 * Bangor -- an off-limits naval base 4 miles west of Poulsbo, home to submarines equipped with Trident missiles

 * (WT-en) Travelpleb 23:38, 5 May 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:Bangor (Washington)


text:
Talk:Bang Thao

TAT Listings
Moved some TAT Sleep listings here that cluttered the page:

 * Allamanda Phuket (อลามันดา ภูเก็ต) 29 Mu 4, Sisunthon Road (Tel: 0 7632 4359, Bangkok Tel: 0 2285 0746-7, Fax: 0 2235 0748 www.allamanda.com), 256 rooms:  US$ 180-270. The family hotel in the complex offering two bedroom suites including kitchenettes and two bathrooms.
 * Amora Beach Resort Phuket (อโมร่า บีช รีสอร์ท ภูเก็ต) 322 Mu 2 (Tel: 0 7632 4021-2 Bangkok Tel: 0 2997 2681 www.phuket-rydgesbeachresort.com), 255 rooms: 2,000-4,500 baht
 * Anchan Resort & Spa (อัญชัน รีสอร์ท แอนด์ สปา) 325 Mu 2, Tambon Choeng Talay (Tel: 0 7627 1250 www.anchanresort.com), 14 rooms: 3,000-10,000 baht
 * Andaman Bang Thao Bay Resort (อันดามัน บางเทา เบย์ รีสอร์ท) 82/9 Mu 3, Tambon Choeng Talay (Tel: 0 7632 5230, 0 7627 0246 www.andamanbangtaobayresort.com), 14 rooms: 2,900-6,900 baht
 * Andaman Seaview Resort (อันดามัน ซีวิว รีสอร์ท) 82/8-9 Mu 2 Baan Bang Thao Choeng Talay (Tel: 0 7632 5798-9 Fax: 0 7632 5800 E-mail: andamanseaviewresort@yahoo.com), 16 rooms: 800-2,500 baht

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 21:56, 15 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Bang Thao


text:
Talk:Banja Luka

I'm from Banja Luka. What one can see of remains of Ferhat-Pasha Mosque is only their basement, so acctualy there is almost noting to see. I recommend to remove this section.

 * Its being rebuild now. -- (WT-en) Eiland 12:00, 7 December 2009 (EST)

Pagebanner
The pagebanner was just replaced. The current one above, the former one below.

User:Слободни умјетник, who replaced the previous banner with the current one, says the current banner is a better one. I find that very hard to judge, as it's a completely dissimilar kind of image. The former banner was a somewhat unusual image of part of an attractive historical train station, which is currently the Museum of Modern Art of the Republika Srpska. The current banner is a panorama. To be sure, the terrain and pattern of vegetation and settlement make the panorama unique, but we have so many panorama banners and so few that are slices of buildings. I appreciate the work that went into the current banner and like the image, but I think I'm leaning toward reverting to the former banner, because a slice of a nice building seems more interesting than yet another panorama, particularly as this panorama is pretty but — no offense, please — not close to breathtaking. Your views, everyone? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:24, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I am the author of the banner that got replaced, so I am certainly not impartial here, but I would like to add that my motivation for creating the "slice of museum building" banner while the panorama was at hand was just as you outlined it. I also wanted to highlight that Banja Luka is a city with some really nice architecture, not just a quite nondescript collection of buildings spread over a hill as it may seem from the panorama. That said, we may consider the latter to be a more accurate and attractive image of Banja Luka to the tourists. PrinceGloria (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Such objects, as the ordinary building of the old railway station is, exists in many cities that were part of the Habsburg monarchy or occupied territories. I think that's not the most representative building of Banja Luka. Banski dvor maybe, but the old railway station from the period of occupation.. I don't think so. This panorama shows the city and its environs, which has a lot of content that are interesting for visitors.--Слободни умјетник (talk) 20:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I prefer the new one too, and find it more characteristic of Banja Luka. The city's green surroundings are an important asset, and I find the image more inviting.JuliasTravels (talk) 21:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Reverted edits
I just reverted this edit because it unilaterally altered the geographic hierarchy (any change in that needs to be discussed at Talk: Bosnia and Herzegovina, and a consensus for the change would have to be reached for it to be executed) and used loaded terms like "barbarian Ottoman trybes." I also think the reverted changes that introduced a history section included too much information that belongs either in an encyclopedia (e.g., Wikipedia) or the article for Bosnia and Herzegovina as a whole. However, there were some things of value in the reverted edits, including historical information that is specially about Banja Luka, which with suitable editing could be well worth including in this article. I'd welcome discussion of what should be excised from the article and what should be added. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Understand section
The current Understand section is:

"The Republika Srpska has a turbulent recent past, which motivates some people to be less than enthusiastic of many things Serb in Bosnia. A 1969 earthquake destroyed most of the town, and in 1993 local Serbs blew up the city’s mosques, including the famous Ferhadija, built in 1580. Ferhadija has been rebuilt."

The first sentence sounds weird in a travel guide. For that matter the turbulent history words can be said of any place in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The other three facts that are mentioned are 1) 1969 earthquake, 2) blowing up mosques and 3) Rebuilding of Ferhadija. How do these pieces of information help *understand* the city? Alaexis (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please go ahead and make the changes you desire, per Plunge forward. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 18:34, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I've left this comment after having my change reverted to explain my reasoning. Alaexis (talk) 19:51, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm grateful for your explanation, Alaexis - спасибо. Obviously I can't make you, but if you know something about Banja Luka that would be of interest to visitors, could you put some information in place of what you delete? Having an 'Understand' section that really does introduce the city as a travel destination would be great. By the way, tensions between Bosnian Muslims and Serbs, if still current, may be relevant to travellers, but information on those would go in a 'Respect' section towards the end of the article. Thanks again, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, agreed with TT. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 22:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I don't know much about Banja Luka, otherwise I would have added something. Just like having no map is preferable to having a wrong one I believer that it's better to have no Understand section rather than a misleading one. Thanks for the suggestion re the respect section. Alaexis (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Banja Luka


text:
Talk:Banjarmasin

Is this the correct spelling? I can't find other references spelled "marsin", only "masin". --(WT-en) Evan 11:36, 7 January 2007 (EST)

 * The correct spelling in Indonesian is definitely -masin. "Banjarmarsin" is not a bad pronunciation guide for English speakers though... (WT-en) Jpatokal 20:46, 7 January 2007 (EST)

Banner deleted
Banner has been deleted. Seems undo not possible due to conflicting intermediate edits. Banner is obligatory, no? Tawonmadu (talk) 10:08, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Hi. I've fixed it just by going back to the last edit when the banner and lead were present, and copying and pasting them into the current article. Thanks for pointing this out. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:04, 25 November 2017 (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) 20:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sabilal Muhtadin.JPG

title: Talk:Banjarmasin


text:
Talk:Banjul

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Banjul-aeroport.jpg

 * Freedom of panorama issue, but not shown on the page, not a great photo and of mild to moderate interest. I don't care if it goes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Banjul


text:
Talk:Bankura

Is Bankura a city or a district? Getty only has a city. What's the geographical hierarchy look like? --(WT-en) Evan 08:55, 4 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Bankura


text:
Talk:Banlung

Get In
Overland Having made this journey in september 2006 (wet season), in my opinion the road between Kratie and Stung Treng is in far better shape than portrayed here. Sure, it's not a highway in any western sense of the word, but it's one of the better roads in Cambodia. The road is partly paved, partly gravel, but negotiable at fairly high speed all the way, even in the wet season. All bridges are made of concrete, not a rusty truss or wooden plank in sight. (WT-en) Hans Hoppe - Since noone objected here, removed "worst highway in the world" reference. (WT-en) hopha

Is $120 for a taxi to Phnom Penh a typo? I was offered the same ride for 70,000 riel (less than $20) from Banlung and it can't be much more in the reverse direction.

 * Plunge forward! But was that $20 for a seat in a taxi or for chartering the whole thing? (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:30, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

 * $120 was for chartering the whole taxi (the ubiquitous Toyota Camry). I doubt $20 would get you much more than a seat in a tightly packed minibus. Did you make the trip for $20? (WT-en) hopha 09:37, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

 * Unfortunately, I don't know. I declined as I was heading to Stung Treng. This was back in April of this year.

 * As of 2010 the quote is $140 for a Pajero to rent the whole vehicle to Phnom Penh. $120 for a 12 seat minivan, which can fill up for the return journey, and so charges the normal $10 per seat for the whole van.

Tour agencies
Some links are dead and some do not exist at all. It looks messy, really, so I moved them all here. Ibaman (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Banlung


text:
Talk:Ban Muang Kut

vfd discussion

 * Maetang River. Not an article.  Not really sure where the camp poorly described within belongs though, probably Chiang Mai (province)? (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:54, 12 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * Not Sure -- Talks about Ban Muang Kut as access to the Maetang River. Maybe we can rename and make this about the Ban Muang Kut village and have the Maetang River a "Do". -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 09:26, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * Agree with Xltel. (WT-en) Majnoona 14:49, 27 February 2006 (EST)
 * This article needs to be deleted and I will delete it. The only info it offers regards elephant camps and rafting. This info can go into Chiang Mai Province (which I linked it to) or is covered indirectly via the Do section of Chiang Mai. Seligne (talk) 09:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ban Muang Kut


text:
Talk:Bannerghatta National Park

Can a visitor not drive through the park?

No, visitors cannot drive through the park.

Also, be advised that if you're an obvious tourist, the guides may "helpfully" take photos with your camera. They may or may not push for tips while you're still on the bus. Be ready for this - if you give in, they may keep pushing until you leave. —The preceding comment was added by 73.39.99.236 (talk • contribs)

 * Hi! Kindly add the information to the article itself, not just to the talk page. Everyone is allowed to edit articles, just click edit. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bannerghatta National Park


text:
Talk:Ban Phe

TAT Sleep Listings
Some sleep listings from TAT, I placed them at Talk:Ban Phe/Listings for future reference. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 23:32, 2 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Ban Phe


text:
Talk:Ban Phe/Listings

Some sleep listings, they'd clutter the page so I just place them here.

Sleep

 * Bann Pae Cabana Garden on the Beach Rayong (บ้า���เพคาบาน่า)206/1-2 moo3, T.klaeng, A.muang,rayong 21160 : 1000-2600 Bth.
 * Baan Siri On Sea (บ้านศิริ ออน ซี) 151 Moo 3 Chargpongse Klang Rayong 21190, Thailand : 1700-5900 Bath.
 * T.N. Place (ที.เอ็น.เพลส) 286/3 Mu 3 (Tel: 0 3865 1824) 12 rooms: 200-350 baht
 * Diamond Phe (ไดมอนด์ เพ) 286/12 Mu 2 (Tel: 0 3865 1862, 0 3865 1757) 29 rooms: 350-700 baht
 * Ko Keaw Resort (เกาะแก้ว รีสอร์ท) 299 Mu 2 (Tel: 0 3865 1681-2) 16 rooms: 400-1,600 baht
 * Novotel Coralia Rim Pae Resort Rayong (โนโวเทล ริมเพ รีสอร์ท ระยอง) 4/5 Moo 3, Pae- Klaeng-Kram Road,Klaeng, Rayong. 2400-4400 Bath.
 * Palmeraie Beach Hotel Rayong (บ้านเพ)177 Moo 1, Pae - Klaeng – Krum Rd., Charkpong, Klaeng, Rayong. 21190 Thailand. : 2000-3900 Bth.
 * Pine Beach (ไพน์ บีช) 38 Mu 1 (Tel: 0 3865 1639-40) 114 rooms: 690-990 baht
 * Rayong Chalet (ระยอง ขาเล่)4/32 หมู่ 3  เพ-แกลง-กร่ำ ต.ชากพง  : 1650 - 4500 baht
 * S.Land (เอส.แลนด์) 199 Mu 2 (Tel: 0 3865 3367) 35 rooms: 500-1,500 baht
 * Tawan-Inn 309/21-22 Soi Tawan Mu 2 (Tel: 0 3865 1635) 8 rooms: 500-2000 baht

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:39, 2 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Ban Phe/Listings


text:
Talk:Bansko

Prices on the rarrow rail from sofia
If anyone knows the approximate price of the voyage, it might might a useful addition to the article (not sure the information is available in English) I'll try to remember to add it myself if I get boots on the ground --Willthewanderer (talk) 14:11, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bansko


text:
Talk:Ban Sok Noi

VFD discussion for Ban Sok Mai

 * The page creation troll is a well-known non-speller. So even if this place exists, which Wikipedia does not acknowledge, it's still probably spelled wrong. -- (WT-en) Colin 14:20, 8 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep and redirect. According to, it's a legitimate alternate spelling for Ban Sok Noi. -- (WT-en) Jonboy 13:02, 9 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Okay, keep then. -- (WT-en) Colin 18:04, 10 May 2006 (EDT)
 * This raises an interesting question: what to do about misspelled pages when the page with the "correct" spelling doesn't exist yet? As far as I can tell, the standard approach for misspellings/alternative spellings is to redirect to the page for the correct spelling, but we can't do that here.  If somebody would take a crack at starting Ban Sok Noi, I'll do the redirect, but I really can't see keeping this one as a stand-alone. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 11:55, 27 May 2006 (EDT)
 * I've moved Ban Sok Mai to Ban Sok Noi, put in an outline and I am now closing the VFD. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 12:41, 27 May 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Ban Sok Noi


text:
Talk:Banteay Chhmar

Comments
I'm currently editing this page. I have lived and worked here in Banteay Chhmar for the past 2 years. Photos to come later.

I'm fairly new to writing/editing Wiki articles.

How do I remove the City name is in Region name section?

I have an introductory section above the Understand section, but I don't know how to edit it. I created it by adding space above the Understand section and typing the content. But, the content is not there when I try to edit the Understand section. This makes sense, but doesn't help me understand how to edit it.

Please advise and advise to any other wiki markups I should use.

The content is basically complete - just need to fix the Intro section and add photos.

Oh, what's the difference between Discussion page and Talk Page? Is this the right place to ask these questions?

Thanks

Andrew(WT-en) Andrewjmarino 04:21, 25 June 2012 (EDT)

 * Yes, this is the talk page. Welcome, and thank you for adding content! So far, this article looks very good.

 * I edited the "City name is in Region name" portion for you, but the way to edit the section at the top of the page is to click the "Edit" button, which you should see next to "Read" and "View history" ("Go" and "Search" are further right) toward the top of your browser. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:38, 25 June 2012 (EDT)

Thanks very much for the help. The text information (i.e. prices etc) is correct. I will try to put in a few photos tomorrow.

Andrew--(WT-en) Andrewjmarino 04:14, 26 June 2012 (EDT)

 * You're welcome, Andrew. I'm sorry for deleting most of your links, because I'm sure you worked hard on them, but it's a matter of style. Here's what I posted in my editing summary: "Sisophon should be wiki-linked the way I did it. We don't provide references in Wikivoyage, only primary links (such as to the site of the temple). Wikipedia links are only to the subject of the article." The thing is, this is not an encyclopedia like Wikipedia; instead, it's a travel guide. Travel guides usually don't have references, but may refer people to other pages within the guide and will provide primary information about a place or attraction. So, by analogy, on Wikivoyage, we provide links to official (governmental) tourism agencies, the website of an attraction (but not of some competing guide or booking service), and other related pages within this guide (such as the article about Sisophon or the travel topic article on the UNESCO World Heritage List). Don't worry too much about running afoul of stuff that's in the Project:Manual of Style; look at it at your leisure. It's much more important to get the content up. But I just wanted to let you know why I deleted some perfectly good references in this article - good indeed, but just not part of Wikivoyage's style.

 * I look forward to seeing the photos. Make sure you upload them at http://shared.wikivoyage.org/wiki/ (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 05:13, 26 June 2012 (EDT)

>>> Thanks, no worries about the editing. I'd like it to be wikivoyage style accurate.

I'm having a problem uploading photos to wikishared. I think my file is correct, but I keep getting an error message (Avalokitesvara_Banteay_Chhmar.jpg)

File extension does not match MIME type

Any ideas?

Also, all the photos will be my own work. I'd like to keep my name/rights attached to the images. Should I just use the default wikivoyage licensing?

And, I thought I saw a gallery of images on another page which might be a nice way to put my images into the article. I think it's done ==Gallery==. Are there any other special markups/rules for using this? Sorry for the questions. Thanks Andrew --(WT-en) Andrewjmarino 22:03, 4 July 2012 (EDT)
 * I think that error is usually caused when you forget to include the file extension in the filename blank. Also, please incorporate your images into the article in the normal, right-aligned way. You are welcome to discuss using a gallery on the talk page there, but galleries usually indicate an overabundance of images, which is generally discouraged.(WT-en) texugo 22:11, 4 July 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:Banteay Chhmar


text:
Talk:Banten

Comments
Banten is eligible to have this unique page because it is not part of west java any more. The information will be more useful if it is separated. The only thing that the contents might be overlapping with those of west java or the authors mistakenly edited it.(WT-en) Tbrifki 11:51, 22 October 2010 (EDT)
 * I agree not to combine the two articles, because after many years of separation, the people of Banten have definitely claimed that they are people of Banten Province. Certainly different administration and also policy about tourism and travel of both of the provinces.(WT-en) Gsarwa 13:18, 7 July 2011 (EDT)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:36, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Chandra Asri Petrochemical Plant in Cilegon, Banten.jpg
 * ✅ ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 21:02, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Banten


text:
Talk:Banyak Islands

from dindo simeulueislandadventures;no problem using content

title: Talk:Banyak Islands


text:
Talk:Banyuwangi

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) 04:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Bangunan terminal Bandar Udara Blimbingsari; 2014.jpg

 * Not used as a visible thumbnail in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Banyuwangi


text:
Talk:Baotou

Hey people. THere are 4 districts in Baotou. Kundulun (Which is called KunQu by Baotou people) Qingshan, Jiuyuan, and Donghe.

KunQu is NOT "communistic industrial (very depressing)". It is where nearly all the bars, discos, ktv's etc are. Qingshan has only one street which has a few, notably a new Kakadu. New, because Kunqu has had one for years. No one goes to Qingshan for anything. To repeat, Kunlundun is NOT the "industrial" area of Baotou. And for the record there is nothing "Mongolian" about Donghe. And it is not colourful.

The person who wrote that has no idea what they are talking about.

Matt

title: Talk:Baotou


text:
Talk:Baratang Island

Images
I'm moving two of the images here for discussion. The first one because it's simply bad photography-- the framing is awful. The second one because the focus seems to be more on the people, and I think if I brightened up the shot a bit I could probably recognize the tour guide's face, which is against our people in photos policy. Any comments?

 * Definitely the right move. There are still too many pictures in the article, and they are badly positioned. It is really good to get such detail for a very OtbP place, but the images need sorting. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 06:58, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Baratang Island