text:
Talk:Russian phrasebook

Untitled
Still need to check my spelling and grammar on a few of the phrases. Am leaving the more complicated phrases till I can get home to my dictionary. My Russian is kind of rusty, this is great practice. (WT-en) Mudbrother 14:21, 16 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Sorry, haven't been able to work on this much lately. Work is really bad. Hopefully will be able to contribute again in a week or so. (WT-en) Mudbrother

Щ
The most common transliteration for this letter for English speakers is indeed shch, but it is not pronounced that way. It is not helpful to instruct native English speakers (such as myself) to pronounce it like harsh choice, because a native speaker attempting to do so will pronounce a sound quite unlike the Russian letter and will not be understood. As I "voiced" in an earlier edit summary, Щ is a relatively long voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative. There is no affricate. No stop. It is a difficult letter to romanize—hence the "ch" in the romanization. That "ch" does not indicate that there is an affricate in the sound—that is a common mistake that native English speakers make when pronouncing romanized Russian names.

Furthermore, this is not a difficult letter for native English speakers to pronounce, it is merely a difficult letter to know how to pronounce. If native English speakers understand what it means for the letter to be a palatalized "sh," then they will be able to pronounce the letter well. If not, they will pronounce it like an English "sh" and in context they will be understood. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:41, 11 December 2007 (EST)

I think ш is similar to sh in shot and щ is sh in sheet. Shoe is a bad example, imho --144.92.110.139 21:05, 6 October 2009 (EDT)

Public domain.
Is the Wikivoyage Russian phrasebook in the public domain? —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 71.253.103.29 (talk • contribs)

 * I regret to tell you that it is not. It is, as is all text on Wikivoyage, automatically licensed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 1.0. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:12, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

Pseudo-pronunciation
I went through and standardized all the phrase pronunciations today, which were all over the place. Few if any conformed to the Project:Pseudo-phoneticization guide, stresses were often placed on the wrong syllable, and vowel reduction was ignored.

I changed the "ы = i" transliteration/pronunciation guide to "ы = yh" because i and ы are very different sounds, and we should note this, even if non-Russian speakers will likely not be able to pronounce it. Y is the standard translation; yh is a better pseudo phoneticization to distinguish it from the "ee" sound that often follows consonants at the end of words in the English language.

I standardized all incidences of "ой" under vowel reduction (e.g., курицой) to "uy". That's not at all ideal, and I'm not sure if native English speakers will get that right. But while it is an easy noise to produce, it is not easy to convey in written form. Basically, the о reduces to schwa. The closest would be "uhy", but that would risk the pronunciation "uh-hee". --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:55, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Belatedly, I'm also using a simple "sh" for all instances of щ. As per above, if we write shch, English native speakers will likely pronounce it incorrectly. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:23, 5 February 2010 (EST)

 * I'm still not down with this whole pseudo-pronunciation thing (rather embarrassing since I've majored in a foreign language) but wouldn't a double ss (ssh) get the point across better? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 15:36, 5 February 2010 (EST)

 * I doubt the pseudo-phoneticization will make a lot of sense to non-native English speakers. But again, it's really not pronounced ssh—there's no s sound. It's just a matter of where the tip of your tongue is when you pronounce sh. I've tried to add a bit more guidance to the consonant section. Hopefully not too much, so as to be confusing! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:59, 5 February 2010 (EST)

Starnom discussion
I'm re-nominating this after a near miss in the slush pile. I have done the work suggested by PerryPlanet, ChubbyWimbus, and AHeneen, but didn't add anything about dialects per Gorilla Jones' suggestion—Russian is very regular, perhaps owing to the excellent and very disciplined Russian/Soviet system of primary education.

It would be nice to have a star phrasebook that other contributors could look to as an example. Does this one look ready to fill that role? --Peter Talk 23:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Support. Nice comprehensive article. — Ravikiran (talk) 18:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't speak Russian but my colleagues that do tell me this is good. -- A l i c e ✉ 08:57, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Support. I'll add my vote of support since this nomination has been pretty quiet. I'd say the concerns brought up in the last nomination have been addressed. PerryPlanet (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I doubt an anonymous opinion would count here but this phrasebook needs some rework to match day-to-day realities. For example, noone ever measures beer in pints in Eastern Europe, and few people even know how nuch a pint is. 176.15.11.225 19:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Spotting the problems so they can be fixed is the main point of the nomination process, so go ahead and point out any other problems, If possible, suggest fixes, as that is even more useful. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the pint bit. There's a phrasebook template that was used to start the article, so someone at some point translated that without considering whether it really belongs. If you spot anything else like that, please change it, or bring it up here. --Peter Talk 19:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Error
"полька (PAUL-kah) - a female Polish" "Полька" means the Polka dance. "A female Polish" — "полячка".

Another good example — "мол" (breakwater); "моль" (moth, mole (unit)). --Midnight Gambler (talk) 13:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

 * If you see errors, please plunge forward and correct them. It won't take you more time than posting about them here, but it will be more helpful. Thanks a lot. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Swear words
I say we shouldn't cover them in any phrasebook, but there's a budding edit war about covering the "most popular" one. What do you all think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:16, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Nu, anyone want to discuss this? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd agree as well. No need to list swear words. A traveler won't need to use them. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * User:46.204.0.20, any comment? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably won't respond. IPs can't be pinged. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:33, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That's unfortunate. I hope they don't continue to edit war when I re-delete that stuff... Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd say we need not include swear words unless there is a very good travel-related reason to, but let's also ask our resident Russian speakers here. Any thoughts, Brateevsky and Wolverène? The dog2 (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I see the context. Nah, it's useless. This will encourage the use of such words although in most of situations they can be (and normally have to be) avoided in regular speech. If your Russian friends use the profanities like 'blyad', it means that they as native speakers are able to assess the context of usage, the setting surronding them, to whom they're saying so... things which a foreign person may not assess properly sometimes. Just simply doesn't sound nice when a foreigner tries to use Russian profanities after remembering phrases from memes or overheard them somewhere. Take a try to use phrases like 'suka blyad' (mentioned in the reference above) being with familiar Russians, and first it may cause tender emotions and sincere laughter, rather because of your accent than because of your 'special knowledge'. Subsequently if you will not stop, you'll be probably rudely mocked. --Wolverène (talk) 12:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello! I think this article isn't suitable for posting this information about Russian profanity (Russian mat). Firstly, as Wolverène rightly said, it is quite possible to speak without the Russian mat. And secondly, Russian mat is very diverse, and the same word in different situations can carry different information and can be translated in different ways. These "words" are very often difficult to translate. F.e. the word "ебать" (yebat') - it can be translated by 10 varians in English (not only "to fuck", but also "wow", "work (hard)"), ... . Because these "words" are mostly emotional rather than informative. Moreover, the number of the most frequently used abusive words is about 50-100 - so why are they all need to be in this article? The only thing, I think, that we can, - to give a link to an article in the English Wikipedia about the phenomenon, - to show that, indeed, Russian mate exists, but is extremely undesirable, etc. - without using the words themselves here. Brateevsky (talk) 17:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Russian phrasebook


text:
Talk:Russian River

Many people, including myself, believe that wikivoyage and wikipedia should not be used with or without links to sites. Doing such is a cheap and poor means to try to get ones sites up in the search engine results, sometimes called "spamming the index". Consider on this page that someone used several references to Jenner and stuck in Jenner-by-the-Sea (which is believed to be used By the Jenner Inn). Likewise a direct entry for another business with name, address, phone, and email. Likewise other places are listed by name, but other wonderful places are excluded. Most definitely I consider it spamming and I am sure that many other people also feel that way. -- —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 66.81.73.183 (talk • contribs)

 * Please see Project:External links for the guidelines regarding external links. External links are fine when they are primary links, ie the official site of a hotel, museum, restaurant, etc.  Linking to other travel guides or adding multiple links to the same site are not OK and those links should be removed. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:43, 16 October 2007 (EDT)

Region?
This looks to be a region article, but isn't formatted like one. Shouldn't the city/town-specific info be moved to city articles, and the top section be converted to a cities list? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:35, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Yes! Beautiful area – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 18:50, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Russian River


text:
Talk:Russia to Japan via Sakhalin

Rail pass activation?
Related to this edit, is it actually possible to activate a Japan Rail Pass in Wakkanai? It's not on the list of stations with exchange counters, - Asahikawa's the nearest, which would unfortunately negate the advice given. - (WT-en) D. Guillaime 20:49, 9 January 2010 (EST)

 * They activated mine, but he might just have been friendly. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 04:20, 10 January 2010 (EST)

Comments
I'm so happy to see someone has actually used this guide - and thank you so much for the additions, one pointer though, avoid me, we or us - and personal accounts - when writing here - it's a collaborative effort.

Really useful guide, way more interesting than just city info. JadeDragon (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Delete?
This route is no longer possible. Should this article be deleted? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

 * No, because it's a guide article and I don't want to ruin the work of several contributors. I think we should store it in a projectspace page until the ferry service restarts, though there is a chance it may never happen. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

 * "Because it's good work" is not a viable argument. Could we archive it somehow? A travel guide needs to be about travel. A beautifully-written entry for a defunct restaurant isn't kept up because it was so well-written. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should've been more clearer. I was thinking of moving the page without a redirect in the Wikivoyage namespace. Something like Archived itineraries/Russia to Japan via Sakhalin though my proposal to do that with old itineraries that were older than one year (instead of deleting) faded away. Maybe we should restart that discussion. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I wouldn't support that as a way to deal with itineraries that lack sufficient information, if that's what you mean. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The ferry was suspended not permanently ceased to operate. It is not the first time the route face suspension.
 * In usual years, service details are announced each years year by year ahead of summer. The 2019 suspension was initially announced as mechanical reason related to the ship, although the low load factor of the route making it financially difficult doesn't help. Then nothing were being announced in 2020 and 2021 with the pandemic ongoing. In 2022 Japan still doesn't appears to be opening up the national border to tourists yet so I doubt the route will resume this year, and I am not seeing any such signs yet, and this is in addition to the ongoing Russian war with Ukraine with relevant sanctions as well as Russian counter to these sanctions by labeling sanction-imposing countries including Japan as unfriendly countries, which probably also prevent the service which require financial subsidy from relevant governments from resuming.
 * The service probably won't be resumed in any short to mid term future considering that those Russian sanctions are unlikely to reverse even after the war end one way or the other in future, however I personally do not believe things are going to last this way eternally either.
 * Also, note that while it is a matter of fact that the ferry did not operate in year 2019, 2020, and 2021, and it is also a fact that so far there haven't been any service detail announcement for 2022 summer either despite we are already well into spring, any forecast into future are nothing more than personal perspective or opinion, and can be wrong in rather unlikely scenario. The service can be resumed anytime, as the service is only announced every year before the service actually start, before the suspension. Given such circumstances I do not agree with either deletion or hiding information by commenting out information in this guide. Given the lack of attendance of this page it is also unlikely that the page can be recovered anytime soon when the route do get resumed.
 * As an alternative to ferry, at least as of year 2019, people would have another option of traveling from Sakhalin to Hokkaido by flying from Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk to New Chitose airport. However the route is currently suspended due to coronavirus related entry restriction in Japan alongside many other Japanese international air route hence I didn't include the air route as alternative in the guide page. It is not clear whether the route is going to resume after pandemic related entry restriction into Japan lift which Japanese government is now acting gradually, as while on one hand I doubt anyone in right mind is going to travel to Russia for tourism or trade amid the currently imposed domestic and international restrictions, on the other hand Japan have not banned Russian flights yet, so if the route's Russian operators want, they can restart that air route anytime they desire, and at that time it will be possible to fill the air route into this guide and let travelers divert via air, despite the route currently being not available either. C933103 (talk) 02:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Is there any way to hide this article temporarily, like I just hid a reference to this defunct route in the Japan article? Alternatively, is there theoretically a way to hire someone to take you across on their own boat or buy or rent a boat and sail yourself, if you were to get permission from the two governments? That seems impossible right now, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:04, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * We have established the principle of keeping but hiding obsolete articles, e.g., articles for past events. As there is a possibility that this route could be revived, we should not delete the article. Ground Zero (talk) 17:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm no longer arguing for deletion, but how do we hide the article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Something like what I proposed above last year, I guess (with a different project name with  added)? --  SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 09:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Around the world there are companies that can help arrange and allow third party passengers to travel on freight ships but that's a big different topic and I am not sure whether such service still operate with respect to Russia.
 * I think if one really want to cross to Japan on Trans Siberian Railway right now, without using a plane, more reasonable way is probably to take the train down Beijing from either Ulan Ude or Vladivostok, then proceed to Shanghai, then continue on ship to Japan (Or Dalian-Ferry-Incheon-Rail-Busan-Ferry-Fukuoka), but visa requirement of China nowadays isn't exactly easy either. C933103 (talk) 06:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Russia to Japan via Sakhalin


text:
Talk:Rustenburg

By bus
An anonymous user left the following commentary: (WT-en) Texugo 02:59, 3 June 2010 (EDT)

Searched everywhere, there seems to be no bus service from Rustenburg to Pretoria.

Yo, this has been about the most annoying thing ever to find- bus information regarding the world cup is almost non-existent on the net.

This article explains where you find bus tickets

http://allafrica.com/stories/201005040218.html

The translux website is terrible- doesn't even tell you that they are providing service.

I recomment the strictly tickets website http://transport.strictlytickets.com/StrictlyTickets

Even though this website was created in the arc they do provide bus and coach services from and to Rustenburg from Pretoria and Johannesburg- however it doesn't tell you where in Johannesburg the buses run from- fingers crossed its not the city centre because i don't want my bus shot at. Tickets are only 120 rand each way.

Perhaps they didn't want to advertise it on the internet because there arn't many buses- ahh well. hope this helps. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 210.8.218.110 (talk • contribs)

title: Talk:Rustenburg


text:
Talk:Rutgers

This is just a university right? not a city? Prolly needs to be deleted, but wanted to check... (WT-en) Majnoona 05:58, 17 Feb 2004 (EST)

title: Talk:Rutgers


text:
Talk:Rwanda

Alternative banner for this article?
How about changing the banner? Jjtkk (talk) 15:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure. The new banner is much more vivid. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

names of cities
The article states "Rubavu, formerly Gisenyi" but Rubavu appears to be the name of the district that Gisenyi is in. Can someone point to an article that shows that the name of the city has changed? --Traveler100 (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Merge all regions?
Given that the region articles are in a pitiful state and there aren't all that many city articles in Rwanda to begin with, should the region articles be merged here for the time being and (perhaps other) regions be created when needed? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:34, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree. Ground Zero (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Anybody else wish to weigh in? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I've never been to Rwanda, but this seems like a good idea to me. It's a pretty small country by area and doesn't have many city articles right now. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Per all of the above, let's ditch the regions and place the bottom level articles directly under Rwanda. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and did it. Now we have to reconcile the city list. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Brewpub
Rwanda's 1st Microbrewery - Women Owned & Brewed Pashley (talk) 03:04, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:08, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * RWFn5000v.jpg

 * Reasoning on Commons:

 * "We have no information about Rwanda's copyright rules regarding banknotes (Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Rwanda). According to the rule Commons:Currency we have assume that these images arn't free (Commons:Currency#Map)."

 * With no information even suggesting there's a copyright problem, I'd suggest we upload this locally. Any objection? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:45, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, agreed. It would be a shame to lose it. Davidbstanley (talk) 16:25, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Locally uploaded. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rwanda


text:
Talk:Rwanda Primate Trekking

Merge
While this article has good information, standard Wikivoyage policy is that most articles are written about destinations, and in order to prevent users from having to go to multiple articles to get information about that destination information about (for example) mountain gorilla trekking would primarily be kept in the Volcanoes National Park article. If that's not appropriate for this subject then an exception could potentially be made, otherwise it would be best to move this article back to appropriate destination guides. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:46, 22 January 2012 (EST)

 * Thanks for the feedback. I was not sure how to organize all the info I wanted to capture. I just returned from these treks and thought that others would find the details about the process and guidance helpful. I am happy to merge it back with the park page but was worried that since I had lots of details data it would overwhelm the main page. Let me know if I merge it back what your recommendation would be for which section I should add it to (or if there should be a dedicated section) Thanks. (WT-en) Aporeilly 13:19, 22 January 2012 (EST)

 * Treks generally go under the "Do" section. A good article to model the trek information after might be Mount Kinabalu, which is another article with very detailed information about a single activity at a location. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:35, 22 January 2012 (EST)

 * Thanks for the pointer. I will update. (WT-en) Aporeilly 15:29, 22 January 2012 (EST)

title: Talk:Rwanda Primate Trekking


text:
Talk:Ryazan

Moscow Times article on Ryazan, in English: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/beyond_moscow/ryazan.html

title: Talk:Ryazan


text:
Talk:Saba

If anyone has any good pictures of The Bottom to create its page, that'd be great. While in Saba, I didn't go there except passing through on the way to the harbor for diving.

Does anyone know what its like to get an internet connection on saba.

cities/villages
I'm not familiar with the island, but does it even need to have separate city/village articles, or is the island digestible as just 1 article? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 20:28, 27 November 2008 (EST)

 * I checked on wikipedia—Saba is half the size of Virgin Gorda and has less than half the population. There is definitely no reason for individual city articles, and hopefully merging that content back into the island article could make this a nice article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:28, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Not a country
Being a special municipality in the Netherlands, doesn't Saba belong in the guide-city or guide-region category, instead of country? (WT-en) Justme 18:26, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

 * For whatever reason, we have been using the country templates in these situations (as with Aruba, Bonaire, etc.). --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:34, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

 * Aruba is a country (or well, at least kind of a country), while Saba is not. However, for travellers, the difference is largely irrelevant. Both are islands in the Caribbean, and kind of feel like separate countries. Mayotte also feels like a country, even though it's a French department. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 20:54, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

 * Okay, so it's the looks and feel rather than status, that determines the templates. Fair enough :-) (WT-en) Justme 03:23, 23 August 2011 (EDT)

 * That's true only in unusual cases (like this one). --(WT-en) Burmesedays 03:37, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Ah, good :-) (WT-en) Justme 04:48, 23 August 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Saba


text:
Talk:Sabah

--Lihing--

Shouldn't Lihing, Sabah's rice wine be mentioned here? 121.6.50.105 05:45, 28 March 2012 (EDT)JY

 * I'm sorry no-one ever replied. Sure, it would be good to mention any speciality. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Philippine claim?
Duterte to pursue Sabah claim. Does this merit mention here? Pashley (talk) 17:10, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Probably, but he'll never be able to enforce it, so it's really more about the odious, murderous extremism coming out of the Philippines than anything else. Of course, we can't call it that in any travel article, but that guy is at least as bad as Trump being elected President in the U.S., which isn't going to happen. He's murdered many people in his so-called "drug war" since his election, and many others in his previous role as Mayor of Davao. I guess I'd have to say I don't know enough to be sure he wouldn't be unhinged enough to attack Malaysia, so yeah, it should probably be mentioned. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

 * (That post didn't age well.) Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Categorisation of Labuan
I've never been to Borneo, so I don't really have much knowledge of this area, but I thought Labuan was a federal territory and distinct from Sabah. I can understand if it does have to be categorised under here though, but I couldn't find previous discussions of this. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:07, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

 * It is a federal territory, but I think a decision was made not to treat it like a separate state, but as I see Putrajaya is treated like one, perhaps this should be revisited. Labuan actually looks longer than Putrajaya. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comparing it to other examples outside Malaysia, we categorise Canberra under Australia, even though it's entirely surrounded by New South Wales, or Washington, D.C. under Mid-Atlantic, not under Maryland even though it's mostly surrounded by Maryland. I'm a bit opinionless now on where Labuan should be breadcrumbed under; it is not a part of Sabah and you can get to Labuan without coming through Sabah, but it's a bit too small to be a region of its own. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's too small to be treated analogously to Putrajaya - keep it as a city article but link it to Malaysia (or if we prefer, create different categories for East Malaysia and West Malaysia and point everything accordingly). Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * So how about it? Should we link Labuan to Malaysia? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd support linking Labuan to Malaysia. But before we do that, someone needs to edit the static map. Alternatively, if we don't have any active editors who can do that, then I'd say the box for Sabah should rather say "Sabah and Labuan" instead, somewhat like how the New South Wales box is formatted in Australia. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Good points. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sabah


text:
Talk:Sabang (Indonesia)

Sabang is a city. Weh, Rubiah, Seulako, and Rondo are islands within the administrative region of Sabang. Thus saying that Sabang is a town located in Weh is wrong.

title: Talk:Sabang (Indonesia)


text:
Talk:Sabha

Sabha - performance or city?
http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Madras#do

If you follow the above link, you'll find where this article started. There was a link in the "Do" section that referred to this article. However, after reading a bit more of the Do section, it would appear that a Sabah would not neccessarily make for an appropriate WikiTravel article. To further explore this theory, I looked in the WikiPedia for a Sabah. The only thing I found was references to a city (and region) in Libya, so I figured it should probably go in that direction. To top it off, the exisiting copy for this article was not much more than gibberish:

"sabha details with all history origin of the sabha how it started,each sabha and its programs must be detailed and given. details of some more famous sabhas like music academy kalakshethra,naradha gana sabha,mylapore fine arts,bharathiya vidhya bhavan -rasika ranjini sabha,hamsadhwani,karthik fine arts, and all must be given "

And as I consider it a little more... maybe this page should probably be a disambiguation page, because Sabha is both a municipality and a city... hmmm...

-- (WT-en) Ilkirk 09:56, 23 Aug 2005 (EDT)
 * You are right. Sabha would mean a concert. In this context, it means a concert of (South) Indian classical music and it is some sort of tradition in Madras. But I don't think it would be an article in Wikivoyage.

title: Talk:Sabha


text:
Talk:Sacramento

About stay safe: K street between 3rd and 13th is pedestrain only, with light rail trains running from 7th to 12th. Its a joke only someone from sacramento would get, and they aren't the ones who need travel advice. when I get soem time, I'll give this an update, but if someone else wants to take a stab, go ahead.

Alternative banner for this article?
In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I prefer the current banner, in this instance. If the new banner were cropped to focus on the bridge plus the river boats, I might possibly feel differently about it. Right now, it feels somehow like too wide a panorama, as the left side past the boats is not interesting to look at, in my opinion. That said, the current banner is good, so there's no urgency in replacing it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The #2 is used in Sacramento County and the #1 is used in Sacramento. I think the other way around is better. I don't think #2 is perfect, for some of the same reasons as User:Ikan Kekek mentioned, but I think the banners make more sense the other way around.
 * I already switched them around, but upon discovered the comments above, I switched them back. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 16:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I, for one, am fine in endorsing your thinking. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Just want to make sure that we're on the same wavelength — I support using #2 here, not because it's a great banner, but because it's more appropriate here than at Sacramento County. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 19:51, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I got that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sacramento


text:
Talk:Sacred sites of India

Er, is this a relevant travel topic?? Shouldn't there be a list on the main India page??

Or we could make a disambguation (i don't know the sp!!!) page. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage 10:08, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * I don't know. What do people think? My idea was to have a page of Sacred sites, which would include information about the various religions in India. In this way, it will help people who are coming to India primarily on pilgrimage or for spiritual reasons in general. At the moment it is just a list of places, but I was hoping that it could be enhanced into a proper travel topic by adding short articles about the religions and their historical connections with India. Also, there would need to be a limit on the number of places listed. Anyway, take a look at the discussion below taken from Talk India - Sacred sites discussion. So far, we have two dissensions (including yours, which I assume is a vote against), and no votes in favor of developing. Anyway, let's see if there's any more comments, and if the general consensus is to delete, then let's stamp her with a VFD. (WT-en) WindHorse 10:50, 20 February 2007 (EST)

My suggestion is this, under the India section we can have a line which says, for a comprehensive list of sacred sites in the country, please see Sacred Sites of India. Make this page into a disambguation (forgive me for my wrong sp, please post the correct sp on my talk page!!) and we could move this article to that. I quote from your previous message — ''My idea was to have a page of Sacred sites, which would include information about the various religions in India. In this way, it will help people who are coming to India primarily on pilgrimage or for spiritual reasons in general. At the moment it is just a list of places, but I was hoping that it could be enhanced into a proper travel topic by adding short articles about the religions and their historical connections with India.'' Sorry windhorse, but I find a number of flaws in what you have suggested.
 * What I mean windhorse, is that wikivoyage travel topics are not intended to be lists of holy sites or national parks. I realize that many people do come to India for pilgrimages, but I have to agree with (WT-en) Mr. Finn on this one. We can have a section under India with a list of about 7-9 towns.
 * Include info on the various religions in India?? That should go in India or India.
 * It will help people coming primarily on pilmgrimages or for spiritual reasons. Will it?? People coming on pilgrimages can refer to the list on the main India page or the disambguation page. Most people who come for pilgrimages are quite sure about where they are supposed to go, so we should really try to improve the Haridwar, Rishikesh, Char Dham, Madurai, Ajanta and Ellora articles instead of wasting time on this fairly pointlesss argument. And the spiritual stuff bit, well, if you refering to weary Americans who come to the East in search of instant nirvana, we can recommend good ashrams and universities in India and more specific info on the city page.
 * .......by adding short articles about the religions and their historical connections with India. That should go to India. The sheer diversity of religions in India can be explained in broader detail there. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage 05:58, 21 February 2007 (EST)

'':I've taken a look at the info for both places on Wikipedia and agree that Char Dham probably is more of an important tourist and pilgrimage site than Madurai. However, until the stuff copied from other sites (eg: ) has been removed from the article, I oppose its addition on the front page. Once this issue has been dealt I will no longer object. Cheers. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:00, 17 February 2007 (EST)''

'':So I haven't thoroughly read the long-winded conversation above, but I just spent about a year in India, and I've never heard of Vrindavan or Chan Dham. Not that that's a measure of much... but if Chan Dham is going to replace something, I think it should be Vrindavan, rather than Madurai. For one, there isn't an article written yet about V, and Madurai is pretty hugely visited, and then also used as a base for the plethora of other temple sites around Tamil Nadu (WT-en) - Cacahuate 03:54, 18 February 2007 (EST)''

'':Ooh, another thought... what about creating a travel topic such as Sacred sites of India, with sections for all of the religions. Then we're not trying to fit a sea of possibilities into a list of 9 (WT-en) - Cacahuate 04:01, 18 February 2007 (EST)''

'':That's a good idea. In fact, let's give that a try. Like national parks, there are just too many sacred sites in India to fit into a selection of nine. A specialist page with the main sacred sites listed will be convenient for people coming to India purely for spiritual reasons. Anyway, I'll set it up, and if there a lot dissent, then we can always hit the roll back button. (WT-en) WindHorse 04:12, 18 February 2007 (EST)''

'':I'll dissent, for one. A comprehensive list of sacred sites for India would be near-infinitely long, and the point of the main India page is to give selected pointers, not whack readers on the head with a phonebookful of listings. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:26, 20 February 2007 (EST)''

'':By setting this up, I was thinking in terms of the major sacred sites, not every garden shrine. It can still be limited, but by increasing the number of sites listed it facilitates more people whose specific purpose to visit India is for pilgrimage. Such a list will give them the opportunity to find places directly, rather than going through regional lists. The hodgepodge list of mixed religious sites on the front page does not accomplish this, because obviously most Hindus will not be interested in the Sikh shrines and Sikhs not interested in the Buddhist ones, and therefore merely listing one Sikh holy place is of no benefit to Sikhs traveling to India on pilgrimage. Now, if you are dissenting on the basis of tourists finding a destination of interest, then the places don't necessarily have to be listed as sacred sites, rather as Other destinations with spiritual significance, because except for Varanasi and possibly Rishikesh/Haridwar most tourists will be less interested in the ritual, special festivals excluded, than in the the architecture. Certainly Ellora and Ajanta fit this category and I believe that most visitors who trek over to Bodh Gaya are Buddhist as are  those who make the journey out to Sarnath, because, to be frank, there is not much there of interest to the casual visitor. To conclude, I feel that a Sacred site list as a travel topic is no less valid than Electronics and entertainment shopping in Thailand, Golf in China, California desert camping or Tramping in New Zealand, because like these articles it serves to supply information suited to a specific group of people with specialist interests and, yes, I do believe that the Sacred sites article should include basic information about the religions and possibly their historical connections with India, and not just be a telephone directory of names. Anyway, I do understand your point, and I fully agree with you if we are looking at the matter from the point of view of a front page listing, and this why it has been changed to a travel topic - to supply more detailed information to a specific interest group. Significant sacred sites that are of interest to tourists can still be listed under Other destinations. Anyway, that's my point, but if you strongly disagree, that's OK. I agree that your point is also valid and that the setting up of a Sacred sites specialist page does have it flaws and draw backs. As with most thing, nothing is 100% right or wrong. Let's see what others think, and I am happy to accord with the general consensus. (WT-en) WindHorse 03:36, 20 February 2007 (EST)''

 * I think this page is totally relevant, whether or not we decide to have it replace the "Sacred sites" section of the India page. Let's continue that replacement conversation over there though (WT-en) - Cacahuate 14:41, 21 February 2007 (EST)

 * Hi Upamanyuwikivoyage. I haven't communicated with you since the Shimla article, which incidentally is looking great. Thanks for you input on this matter, though I would like to make a few comments with regard to  the points you raise. First of all, I feel the Understand section is for general information, so while the religions of India can be introduced there, it does not provide adequate space for such  a profound and complex subject matter to be given justice. Even before we discuss the needs of dedicated believers, we need to recognize that ordinary tourists also require at least basic information about the philosophy, rituals and customs associated with the religious sites that that they will visit during their stay in India. However, at the moment, there is absolutely nothing.  Of course, all this information can be mentioned on each and every sacred site article, but as most of the information is standard for all temples/sacred sites belonging to a particular religion, I believe that it would be convenient if this information was covered under one specific heading. Even general guides like Lonely Planet or Rough Guide dedicate several pages to these matters. While I agree that people already booked on a pilgrimage package tour will know where they are going, others who are traveling independently might like to consider their options. For example, a Hindu may consider staying in Varanasi and then traveling somewhere not too far, such as Haridwar, or maybe they would prefer to limit their pilgrimage to just the east and south only. Whatever, they will need information to assist with this decision. Furthermore, whether those coming to India for spiritual purposes are people looking for instant enlightenment, are deeply committed believers or overseas Indians returning to the mother land is no concern of ours.  A travel guide is created to offer information to all travelers, not only those the author or contributors feel an affinity with. Therefore, from the point of view of creating a travel guide, there is no difference in providing information for people wanting to find a place to meditate than providing it for surfers looking for good beaches in Thailand or families trying to locate hiking trails in Scotland. Actually, even Japan and Thailand (and possibly other countries) have printed guide books purely dedicated to information on monasteries and sacred sites, and those countries have far less such places than India. Anyway, those are my points, but having said that, I also think that your argument is reasonable and perhaps you are right and that the subject matter doesn't require a dedicated article. However, as Cacahuate seems to feel that it does, I won't enter it for VFD at the moment. Instead, let's first explore ways to try and develop the article to accommodate everyone's (most people's ?) concerns and incorporate their ideas. What do you and others think? (WT-en) WindHorse 22:42, 21 February 2007 (EST)

Proposal
First we need a consensus of keeping or deleting. Comments would be appreciated. If delete is the overwhelming majority, then I'll propose for vfd. If people prefer to keep, then I propose the following set up:
 * For each section give background info on the religion, with particular attention being given to its connection and significance to Indian culture/history.
 * Brief explanation of common images that tourists will encounter in India such as Shiva, Vishnu in Hinduism, Tara, Padmasambhava in Tibetan Buddhism etc. ect.
 * Info on respect - eg: are there entry restrictions based on sex or belief? What kind of clothing is acceptable? are leather items banned? Are there restrictions on non-veggie/alcohol within a temple confines? etc. etc.
 * List of places: I believe that the Hindu section requires more listing than the others religions, but how to divide up - 7 names for each religion, and then divide India into north and south for Hinduism, giving it a total of 14 listings?

At the moment this section is a mess - just a list of names - so It would be great if a decision could be made whether to keep or not. If keep, then I/we can begin the process of turning the current telephone directory into a proper travel topic. Otherwise, I can propose for vfd and move on. Thanks I'd appreciate any feedback/input. (WT-en) WindHorse 20:05, 23 February 2007 (EST)

 * Keep - While I can't lay out a clear vision at the moment, I'd love to see how this page develops... it's as relevant as any other travel topic we have, I think... and could also be somewhat of an itinerary, walking someone through the Buddhist 4-destination circuit of Bodh Gaya, Kushinagar, Sarnath and dipping over the border to Lumbini, for example... or on a circuit of the big temple sites in Tamil Nadu... I don't think (unless there's some policy somewhere) that we should have to limit it to 7 per section or whatever... obviously it shouldn't turn into a yellow pages since there are millions of place with some little link to a minor deity all over India, but I think the point of this page is to expand beyond the constraints of the "Other destinations" section and give a more in depth look at the possibilities - 1 page to look at that can guide someone interested in touring sacred sites to the area(s) they're dreaming about... I think it's got lot's of potential :)  (WT-en) - Cacahuate 13:28, 24 February 2007 (EST)

 * Thanks for your input. I am probably not the best person to write this article, but anyway I have had a go kick starting it. Please take a look, and tweak and change at will. I appreciate your opinion about not limiting the number of sites listed, though I am afraid that without doing so we may be overwhelmed by contributors making subjective edits. India really has a lot of sacred sites, and personally, I think it would be beneficial to travellers to only list the more important ones. That's why I thought 7 for each religion multiplied by two for Hinduism (by dividing the country in to north and south) would be a good start - which is still far more than the original front page list that offered space for only nine sites for all religions. Also, from experience, I know that it can be almost impossible to persuade a contributor not to add a place unless we can show them some regulation. Anyway, I haven't not added restrictions and will not do so unless you and others agree to it. Thanks again for your suggestions. (WT-en) WindHorse 03:24, 25 February 2007 (EST)

Ps. I think your idea for developing itineraries is very good. Maybe that can be the next development.

 * Yeah, good point, we should probably have a limit... I'll think some more about the itinerary thingy too... (WT-en) - Cacahuate 03:56, 25 February 2007 (EST)
 * Great. I've added a note to restrict the number of places listed to seven. However, if that doesn't go well, it can be changed - nine would be the limit. Yeah, an itinerary would be a useful addition. By the way, thanks for your constant and helpful feedback. I appreciate it. (WT-en) WindHorse 04:38, 25 February 2007 (EST)

 * No problem, same to you! I know how it is to try to get something done or moving without others paying attention! (WT-en) - Cacahuate 18:55, 25 February 2007 (EST)

 * First, my vote is to Keep. We need to discuss the direction this article is taking, but whatever we do, we shouldn't lose the material we are compiling here by precipitously deleting this article. WindHorse, please don't stop development on this article, because if not here, it will come out to be useful in a sub-article.
 * Second, I see two ideas for this article. Either we make it a list like the list of Indian states or the list of states of the US. The problem is that Wikivoyage as a rule doesn't do lists and those lists aren't "real" articles. The reason for keeping them was that it would be useful as a checklist while writing other articles. If we keep this as a list, that would be a very good reason for keeping this. i.e. Someone who wants to write an itinerary can use this as a reference.
 * The other idea is that we make this a travel topic. But this is too big to be a travel topic, so this will be a main article for a whole bunch of sub-topics and itineraries. A good rule of thumb while deciding the scope of a Wikivoyage article is "Can I print it out and use it as I go?" I cannot imagine myself printing the whole Sacred sites of India article - not just because of the size. But I can imagine printing out a specific itinerary if I am going on a Hindu/Buddhist/Islamic pilgrimage, or an article about where to find great examples of South Indian temple architecture, etc. So as and when a topic develops so as to be of interest to a specific kind of traveller, we split it out into a separate travel topic or itinerary as the case may be. With that in mind, please don't limit any list to 9 just because of our rule. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 07:38, 26 February 2007 (EST)

 * Hi Ravi-ji. Thanks for your positive and helpful feedback. Actually, I used standard printed guidebooks as a models. Generally these guides offer some background information about a country's specific religions, introduce the iconography and also offer a list of related sacred places. I was probably not the best person to have attempted this, but anyway I thought that we needed a prototype model, and so had a go establishing the Buddhist section. If others could help with info about Hinduism/Jainism etc, it would be helpful, as I am even less knowledgeable about their general philosophy. However, I have hung out at enough Hindu temples (as a veggie, I really appreciate their food) to possibly manage the general rules. I agree that as it grows it should be split into new articles (probably along religious rather than geographic lines), though I am slightly afraid that if there are no limits on the number of listings it may turn into a yellow page directory with everyone's aunt's favorite tree shrine listed (gasp!) As Cacahuate suggests, itineraries can be added. Slowly, Slowly. (WT-en) WindHorse 08:25, 26 February 2007 (EST)

 * Hey windhorse, good work. While I'm not too comfortable with this being a travel topic (and I feel that my reasons are justified), I'd love to see this develop and we can sort it out later. Keep up the good work and I'll be happy to contribute. The way it is developing now, I sometimes feel that it isn't such a bad idea as I thought at first glance. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage 07:35, 28 February 2007 (EST)

 * Thank you. Yeah, I think at first most people thought that it was going to be just a list of places, like a telephone directory. That was my fault for not explaining well what I had in mind. Also, I agree that your point of view was reasonable, and I took that into consideration and appreciated your feedback. At the moment, I am trying to work on an itinerary for a short pilgrimage of the four main Buddhist sites. However, as I didn't travel directly between them when I visited, I don't have exact details of the travel time. Once I get this, I'll start it. Anyway, I look forward to seeing your contributions. Take it easy. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:18, 28 February 2007 (EST)

Sites sacred to more than 1 religion
I don't think this section is necessary. For eg, the Ajanta/Ellora Caves are sacred to Buddhists, Jains and Hindus. So let's have it under each of the 3 sections instead of having it in a separate sec. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage 07:38, 28 February 2007 (EST)
 * Agree. That will make it easier when we split it off to separate articles. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 08:34, 28 February 2007 (EST)
 * Ok. I'll do that. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:03, 28 February 2007 (EST)

A better proposal?
I don't think I could support having this page, but I could support having something similar to One month in the Holy Land. I'm highly interested in pilgrimages and I actually want to go wandering through the Sinai desert for a couple of weeks - though there are some problems like long distances between towns, where I'll get food and water - but the point is I think there can be a place for itineraries catering to pilgrims. I don't know much about Hinduism, but it seems to me Hindus (and non-Hindus) would be better served by a Hindu pilgrimage in India article, rather than whatever this page is. I'm trying to think in terms of practicality and I just can't imagine how this article, even if it does fill up, would be useful. Also, I'm not sure about how important India is in the pilgrimage of Muslims, but that could be shipped off to One month in the Muslim Holy Land, which is currently a redirect to Hajj, but this is only an example. Thoughts? -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 14:05, 28 February 2007 (EST)

 * Hey, thanks for your feedback. Obviously a pilgrimage is the main point of an article related to sacred sites. However, when a casual tourist visits a country where religion is an important aspect of every day life, as it is in India, Nepal and Bhutan, they will encounter religious imagery on every street corner, and if it were me, I would definitely be interested to know something about it. If you check the printed guides, such as Lonely Planet of Rough Guide, they all have several pages dedicated to explaining the basic philosophy, historical background, imagery and customs of local regions. Obviously, it is not an in depth discussion like Wikipedia, but it is there and offers sufficient information to keep tourists reasonably informed about these matters. Don't you think that people traveling in India would be interested to know what the images that they will see in every restaurant, house and temple represent, or what is the basic philosophy behind the practices that they will encounter at the numerous temples they will visit? Actually, in the early days when the article was first started, I almost entered it for vfd consideration as I thought there was no support. However, several people who are familiar with India expressed a wish to keep it, so instead I decided develop it on the lines of the consensus. Personally, I don't really care so much either way. It was just an idea. So, anyway, what are people's suggestions. Obviously, a pilgrimage route will be of interest only to believers of that religion, but what info can we offer the casual tourist? Should the article be split up based on interest groups? At the moment the momentum of the article seems to heading in the direction of developing separate pages for each religion, which will contain the understand and respect sections, and from these main pages two or three pilgrimage itineraries would be split off. However, that can obviously change based on people's ideas. But anyway, I think that at the moment it is important to work on the premises that we will keep the article, and that needs to be clear, otherwise we are constantly stuck in limbo with no-one developing the article and no-one deleting it. Is that ok? If so, then we can turn our attention to developing a consensus on how to develop it in a way that will be of value to travelers in India. How do you feel about that? Anyway, thanks again for your feedback. I appreciate it. (WT-en) WindHorse 21:43, 28 February 2007 (EST)

 * That kind of wording makes much more sense to me than some of the previous discussions on this page, meaning I understand the reasoning more concisely. I'm kind of stuck on the issue, now, because I can see how it might be useful...  I'll think about this a bit more. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 22:02, 28 February 2007 (EST)

 * Great. I'll be interested in your conclusions and proposals. The more minds that contribute to the fabric, the richer it becomes. By the way, reading back over what I wrote, I hope you didn't feel that I was strongly opposing the option of deleting the article. I wasn't, and I am happy to do so if that's the way the consensus flows. I was just making the point that it necessary to make a final decision to keep or not and then move on. Otherwise, the article is always stuck in limbo. Anyway, thanks again for your input. (WT-en) WindHorse 22:16, 28 February 2007 (EST) Ps. hope you can make it to the Sinai one day. I've never been there, but it sounds great.

 * I think I'm sticking with my original proposal - break everything up into itineraries. I was conflicted on WindHorse's reasoning for the article (that traveller's will want to know about religions and the roles they play in the society/cultural history of India), but to solve that I also proposing giving a run down of the important religions in the Culture section and with a notice, such as: The rich philosophical and religious history of Indian culture would be impossible to document, however, for an overview of the importance of religion in India please see this itinerary, the next one, this one, and last, but not least this one. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 01:44, 2 March 2007 (EST)

 * That's fine, though I wonder how we can get around having to repeat the same 'understand' and 'respect' information on each itinerary article, which could conceivably run to several for Hindu pilgrimages. (WT-en) WindHorse 02:28, 2 March 2007 (EST)

 * I'm not sure we can, or if we want to get around it. I'm trying to fathom how to even tackle the "Understand" section of the Christian Holy Land article, but there's a problem...  Depending on who you ask the same holiday takes place on a different date.  Then certain denominations have certain rites and traditions others don't.  It may be somewhat more complicated for a Methodist or Lutheran to figure out what's going on, if they're visiting a Greek Orthodox church.  Maybe an easier example are Muslims.  What Shia Muslims may consider a holy site, isn't necessarily so for Sunni Muslims so different respect and understand sections will be needed depending on to whom we're catering an article to.  Same goes for Buddhists and Hindus, I think. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 02:55, 2 March 2007 (EST)
 * For Buddhist and Hindus the main sacred sites in India are the same among the denominations, such as Bodh Gaya for Buddhists, Varanasi for Hindus etc. Likewise, while there will be a few differences in customs and respect, in general they are pretty standard. So, the info currently given in the 'Understand' and 'Respect' sections pretty much covers all eventualities. For festivals that differ in date, we will just have to add the two or more dates. In Bhutan there are some regional variations for festivals, rather than religious ones, and these are both mentioned. Let's see if someone else can offer some thoughts and ideas. (WT-en) WindHorse 03:39, 2 March 2007 (EST)

Name change

 * Thinking over Sapphire's comments, I wonder whether the title of this page should changed to reflect its aims - which I consider to be offering tourists some background info on the religions that have formed and integrated with Indian culture, as well as informing them about the meaning of the symbols and icons that they will encounter on the streets of India and also advising about the 'dos' and 'don'ts' at temples and sacred sites. Specific pilgrimages can be linked to the main Indian page culture section and also to this page. In this way, the basic info will not need to be repeated on every itinerary. If this is accepted, then the name should be simpler, perhaps in the mold of similar fact-based articles such as Soccer in Europe or African flora and fauna. So, how about just 'Religions in India'? Then as the specific sections grow, they can be split off into 'Buddhism in India', 'Hinduism is India' etc. Although the 'India' part of the title might appear superfluous, I think it is necessary because the 'Understand' and 'Respect' sections will be somewhat India focused. In short, will it satisfy everyone if the name is changed to 'Religions in India' or to put it another way, will doing so help alleviate objections to keeping the article? (WT-en) WindHorse

I dunno about Religions in India, but Sacred sites of India seeems okay for now. After all, it's going to be split up into itenaries later (as (WT-en) Cacahuate suggested) and the info will be merged with other artcles. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel )• 04:56, 6 March 2007 (EST)
 * Well, the reason I raise this is because at the moment the emphasis has shifted from a list of sites to articles offering basic info about the religions. I agree that the article may finally get split along religious lines, with branch articles for itineraries. However, the focus of the main article (whether in its present state with a mixture of religions or as a one religion articles) will always be to provide basic info on the religions for tourists, and sacred sites will not be a main feature on these pages as they will be formed into separate itinerary articles. Comments/feelings? (WT-en) WindHorse 05:16, 6 March 2007 (EST)
 * Well, maybe you're right... (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel )• 05:48, 6 March 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Sacred sites of India


text:
Talk:Sacred sites of South Asia

I think it's weird that the lead photo is of a mosque, especially considering the first section deals with Buddhism. At first, I figured it was a photo of a Buddhist temple, but alas it wasn't. Do we have any photos of a Buddhist temple we can use as the lead photo? -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 02:04, 23 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Well, I think finding a perfect opening image for this article is going to be difficult with so many major religions based there... there's not much reason to choose Buddhist over Islam, and the Jama Masjid is one of the more well-known sites on the sub-continent. Once this is a little more filled out I'll try to make a map for it, maybe that would make a less contentious main image for this particular article? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 02:09, 23 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Contentious, my ass. It's simply a matter of logistics: the first photo would ideally match up with the first section, which is about Buddhist beliefs.  If someone has a problem about the what the first section is, let the alphabet sort that out. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 02:15, 23 June 2007 (EDT)

 * I see what you're saying. I think the lack of a meaty intro and the largeness of the photo currently make it look like it's taking over the Buddhist section... but maybe beefing up the intro and downsizing the pic (or another we choose to replace it) is the way to go, not making the first section dictate what image goes as the lead? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 02:26, 23 June 2007 (EDT)

Purpose of this page?
Is the purpose of this page to provide a listing of 'sacred', as in 'regarded with more than the ordinary level of veneration by a religion', sites? Or is it to provide a listing of noteworthy religious sites that may be of tourist interest. If the latter, then Christianity (St. Thomas Mount in Chennai, Bom Jesus in Goa) and Judaism (the sixteenth century synagogue in Cochin) should perhaps be included. If the former, then, I guess, we can give the Christians and the Jews a pass. (Are there any pagan religious sites in India?) --(WT-en) Wandering 18:17, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Good question. As you know, when people visit India, they will be confronted by religion at street level. There will be icons in hotel lobbies and precariously balanced on street stalls and stuck on the front of taxi dashboards. So, one part of the article is to provide info about the meaning of the most common symbols. In addition, many travelers head to India purely to experience the indigenous and popular religions, so another part of the article is to provide information about the sacred sites themselves and the etiquette to be observed when visiting such places. In this way, as with articles such as those on 'altitude sickness' and 'food poisoning' the article can serve as a central point of information, and so saving us the need to repeat the same information on every article where a temple is mentioned. At the moment it is a bit of a hodge podge, but hopefully it will evolve and the articles will be be split up, perhaps first along religions lines and then later with a focus on itineraries. In the same way that I wouldn't link a primary article about Hindu or Buddhist sacred sites and temples to the Middle East (though there are some there, especially in Afghanistan), I wouldn't place the Judea Christian traditions in an article on religions of the Indian sub-continent. The Middle East is their natural home, and I think that's where such info should be located. It could be argued that Islam should not be included as it was not  born in the Indian sub-continent, but it has such a strong presence there, not only in Pakistan and Bangladesh, but also in India, and there are so many ancient mosques in the region that it would be doing a disservice to travelers not to include it. Anyway, to reiterate, the idea of the article is to provide info on the religions of the area for travelers at two levels: the basic details about symbols and rituals that are experienced at street level and also to offer more detailed info for travelers who plan to visit sacred and religious sites. Lonely Planet and Rough Guide have similar introductions, so you can get some idea of what this article is trying to achieve if you check out those guides. I hope that answers your questions. Take it easy. (WT-en) WindHorse 22:53, 23 July 2007 (EDT)
 * I guess the page is largely meant for those who go seeking religion in India, which would be predominantly Buddhism and Hinduism with the odd Jainism thrown in. Not sure how well Islam fits into this but I guess it is big in India. Thanks!--(WT-en) Wandering 13:35, 24 July 2007 (EDT)

"Indian subcontinent"
Can't we just call it "Sacred sites of South Asia"? That's the name Wikivoyage gives to the region, which also includes countries that are not India, such as Pakistan, Nepal, etc. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:19, 9 January 2010 (EST)

Adding Taxila
Taxila is a major Buddhist site, I'm adding it. --(WT-en) Awiseman 09:46, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

Christian sites?
I realise India is not a major place for Christian sites as it is for other religions, but are there some worth mentioning? There are fine old churches in at least Calcutta & Goa. I think the tomb of Thomas the apostle is somewhere around Calicut. Pashley (talk) 02:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

 * See Thomas_the_Apostle; the whole thing gets pretty complicated. Pashley (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

 * Christianity has as much of a right to be discussed here as Islam. It may not have been founded on the Indian subcontinent but it has had a very long and strong presence. We could even have smaller sections on Judaism, Zoroastrianism and Baha'i. Gizza ( roam ) 04:21, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

 * For Zoroastrians, see Parsi. Pashley (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

 * I think they can be mentioned, even if probably most people who travel to the Subcontinent to visit sacred sites are looking for Hindu and Buddhist sites. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist sites. Remember, the Taj Mahal is a sacred site for Islam. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Move to Sacred sites of South Asia?
[headline edited] We use the term South Asia to describe the relevant region. Shall we use [edit] Sacred sites of South Asia, as well? /Yvwv (talk) 03:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

 * The region name is unimportant, but it's sites, not cities. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:17, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

 * It ain't broke, so don't fix it. Pashley (talk) 12:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * – this may help distinguish ourselves from The Other Site, and we should try and use terms used in our region structures. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:25, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is already fairly long. Do you plan on adding sites in all other South Asian countries to this article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I thought the only country in the Indian subcontinent not part of South Asia was Afghanistan per Wikipedia, but we cover Afghanistan under Central Asia. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, and what about my question? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Every single site mentioned here is also in what we call South Asia because per our definitions, South Asia = Indian subcontinent. To your question, I don't plan on adding any further sights. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Then we shouldn't rename it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

 * If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If someone wants to add a redirect, I would not object much, though I think it would be pointless.
 * For that matter, I realise I'm in a minority, but I'd move South Asia to Indian subcontinent. Policy is to use the common English name & to me that is more important than political correctness. Pashley (talk) 07:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

 * South Asia is used often in the U.S., at least. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Sacred_sites_of_the_Indian_subcontinent
A comment says not to change the list without discussion. I'm tempted to ignore it, but ...

Taxila does not belong in a section on Hindu sites. It is already mentioned in the Buddhist section.

I'd add Mamallapuram & Kurukshetra. Pashley (talk) 02:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

 * I went ahead & removed Taxila. Pashley (talk) 03:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sacred sites of South Asia


text:
Talk:Sacred Valley of the Incas

Questions about scope
I believe this article contains more than actually is in the Sacred Valley, but it's handier to have all the things around Cuzco in one article than to scatter it around in Get Out sections. "Sacred Valley and Around" would probably a better name, but I think people will understand anyway. (WT-en) Ronald 15:02, 4 Feb 2006 (EST)

Does this qualify as a wikivoyage article? We generally don't have articles for valleys. See Project:What is an article. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel ) • 05:19, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

 * I think it does qualify, as a region of Peru. The "See" section however doesn't follow the Manual of style. I see the value in having the Inca Ruins sites gathered together for someone who is specifically interested in that, but in that case we should make a seperate travel topic or itinerary. For this article, if it's going to continue to be used as a "Region" article, the destinations should be divided up among the "Cities" and "Other destinations" sections, I think. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 15:58, 24 June 2007 (EDT)

Salineras, Maras, Urubamba: Merge?
Do we need two articles for Salineras and Maras? They could probably be merged into Maras or even Urubamba, I think. Any opposition? Nicolas1981 (talk) 07:00, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know, because I haven't been to any of these places. But please start discussions on the appropriate talk pages and link them here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Nicolas1981, Ikan Kekek, as per Talk:Maras I agree on the merge of the content of Salinas into the "See"/"Go next" sections of the closer cities. -- Andyrom75 (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You're not agreeing with me; I just wanted the discussion to be in the appropriate place. I have no opinion about this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:04, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ikan Kekek I agreed on the first question, but I've mentioned you too because you have taken part on the discussion. If you know the appropriate pages, you can highlight this one there, otherwise no problem. Cheers, -- Andyrom75 (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sacred Valley of the Incas


text:
Talk:Sadao

Sadao or Dannok
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the contents of this page refer to the border town of Dannok (which is in Sadao district, hence the checkpoint name), which is just across the border from Bukit Kayu Hitam in Kedah, Malaysia, rather than Sadao town about 10km away towards Hat Yai. Rename the page Dannok? (WT-en) Slleong 10:18, 31 January 2007 (EST)

 * Do we really need two articles? Most border towns (eg. Aranyaprathet) manage with one, even if the physical border and the nearest city are a few km apart. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:27, 31 January 2007 (EST)

 * I think (at least as far as non-Thais and non-Malaysians in the process of crossing the border are concerned) Sadao is the much more commonly used and better known name. How about redirecting Dannok to Sadao, explaining the relevance of the Dannok name in the Sadao intro, and using the Sadao article to cover everything? ~ 61.91.191.6 11:59, 31 January 2007 (EST)

 * Ok. Stick with Sadao with mention of Dannok. My only worry is say when you catch the van from Hat Yai, asking for Sadao may leave you 10km short of the border. It was not a problem when Dannok was just a few shops by the border gate. Now, it is the same size or even bigger than Sadao town. What I meant originally was to have just one page, either Sadao or Dannok. Won't make much sense having one for Sadao and another for Dannok. Most pairs of border towns do have their own pages - eg Aranyaprathet and Poipet, Mae Sai and Tachilek etc. (WT-en) Slleong 12:40, 31 January 2007 (EST)

[[Project:Plunge forward|Plunging forward
Added ", after 11pm you probably won't get a ride for less than 100 Baht. "  with regards to the minibus
 * Great! In the future, no need to mark your changes with a note on the talk page, just go ahead and make whatever changes you think should be made! --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 13:57, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

Hotel listings
I'm moving these from the province article. The list is too long, unsorted, and needs formatting, so I'm plopping it here til I or someone else has time.
 * Berlin Guesthouse (เบอร์ลินเกสท์เฮ้าส์) 24/5 Sukhaphiban 1 Road,Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1901-2), 33 rooms: 350-400 baht
 * Chai Daen (ชายแดน) 142 Phetkan Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1013, 0 7452 1392), 36 rooms: 180 baht
 * Hollywood Palace (ฮอลลีวู้ดพาเลซ) 7/2-6 Soi 7 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakham (Tel: 0 7443 4298-300), 50 rooms: 550 baht
 * I.P.D. (ไอพีดี) 99 Soi 8 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7430 1585-8), 84 rooms: 650-800 baht
 * J.J. (เจเจ) 42/2 Mu 2 Sukhaphiban Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1660-1, 0 7452 1495), 54 rooms: 120-350 baht
 * Light House (ไลท์เฮ้าส์) 118 Phetkan Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1368, 0 7452 1233), 30 rooms: 300-500 baht
 * M.K. Guesthouse (เอ็มเคเกสท์เฮ้าส์) 271/4 Anamai Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1797, 0 7452 1060), 48 rooms: 200-300 baht
 * Marina Inn (มาริน่าอินน์) 10 Soi 6 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7443 4312) 26 rooms: 400 baht
 * P.J.House (พีเจเฮ้าส์) 38 Soi 3 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7430 1087-9), 32 rooms: 600-900 baht
 * P.P. Hotel (พีพี) 69 Mu 7 Kanchanawanit Road, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7443 4082-5 Fax: 0 7430 1416), 57 rooms: 500-600 baht
 * Padang Central (ปาดังเซ็นทรัล) 999 Mu 2, Sirimongkhon Road,Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1613, 0 7444 4345-7), 78 rooms: 428-535 baht
 * Risa Mansion (ริซ่าแมนชั่น) 78 Soi 8 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7430 1100), 14 rooms: 150-300 baht
 * Royal Inn (รอยัลอินน์) 24/6-7 Sukhaphiban 1 Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1430, 0 7452 1721), 36 rooms: 360 baht
 * Sadao Plaza (สะเดาพลาซ่า) 14/3 Ruamsuk Road (Tel: 0 7441 2373, 0 7441 1936), 25 rooms: 300-500 baht
 * Satit (สาธิต) 24/9 Sukhaphiban 7 Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1981-4), 60 rooms: 500 baht
 * Satit (สาธิต) 1/1-6 Soi 6 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7452 3875), 70 rooms: 500-600 baht Website
 * Siam Orchid (สยามออร์คิด) 208-217 Mu 1, Padang Besar Road (Tel: 0 7452 1478-9, 0 7452 1961-3 Fax: 0 7452 1964), 50 rooms: 290-380 baht
 * T.M.T. (ทีเอ็มที) 55 Kanchanawanit Road (Tel: 0 7443 4150-1), 26 rooms: 300-500 baht
 * Thai-Malaysia Hotel (ไทย-มาเลเซีย) 10 Mu 2 Sirimonkhon Road, Tambon Padang Besar (Tel: 0 7452 1021), 40 rooms: 170-250 baht
 * U.T. Hotel (ยูที) 8-10 Soi 7 Thai-Changlon Road, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7443 4215), 30 rooms: 300-400 baht
 * Villa Inn (วิลล่าอินน์) 90-92 Soi 2 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 7430 1596-7), 32 rooms: 550-600 baht
 * Zayang Guesthouse (ซายังเกสท์เฮ้าส์) 42-43 Soi 6 Thai-Changlon, Tambon Samnakkham (Tel: 0 1766 4523), 8 rooms: 300-1,000 baht
 * Satit Grand View (โรงแรมสาธิตแกรนด์วิว) 28 Soi.Karnjanaruju3, Sumnakkham,Sadao, Songkhla (Tel: 0 74 557 363), 210 rooms : 850-1200 bahtWebsite

title: Talk:Sadao


text:
Talk:Sado Island

This article is growing nicely! Would it make any sense to start to split this up into cities? Not sure how the division should go though -- Ryotsu, Sawata/Mano, Ogi, Aikawa? (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:46, 17 May 2006 (EDT)

 * I am not certain it would look fine, because there are places outside of the above division (ex : north coast, or kanai, or the central plain as a whole...). Another idea would be to order things a little bit in Do/See. Rather by towns, I would suggest "Kosado / Kunikaka / Osado", without splitting into sub articles, but rather in subparagraphs. (WT-en) Pmust 01:23, 17 May 2006 (EDT)

I don't know enough about the details to add anything to the article, but I have heard that Sado has more Noh theatres (stages) per square mile than anywhere else... I don't know how frequently things are performed, or how officially, or how traditionally - if anyone knows more, it'd be a great thing to add to the article. LordAmeth 08:24, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Sado Island


text:
Talk:Safeco field

In regards to whether this articles deserves to stand alone or be merged into Seattle. I argue it should be it's own. Safeco Field, as the article is written, is not an attraction, but a "district" or "neighborhood" including not just the ballpark but the restuarants, vendors and street life around the ballpark on game day.

 * That could be said of many attractions, certainly all major league stadiums. It does not meet the article criteria. (WT-en) OldPine 21:22, 5 October 2007 (EDT)

 * Which district should this be merged in to? 203.189.134.3 10:36, 18 October 2007 (EDT) ~

 * It's Seattle/Downtown -- there's already a listing there. --24.147.175.14 10:51, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

 * Thanks. Content moved to Talk:Seattle/Downtown. ~ 203.189.134.3 11:02, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Safeco field


text:
Talk:Safed

Arab Safed?
Isn't a large percentage of the population of Safed Arab? It seems to me that things Jewish are covered well in this guide, but there is almost no mention of Arabs. Someone who's more knowledgeable than I am about the city should post more about the Arab community, to redress that omission. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:12, 10 June 2011 (EDT)

- According to wikipedia, citing CBS figures, Safed is 99.2% Jewish with no significant Arab presence.

Alternative banner for this article?
In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Please give some insight into the criteria you're using, because I don't understand why you prefer the new banner, as the current one is more colorful. Please explain what I'm missing. Is there something you find technically better about the new banner? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Keep the existing colorful banner. Not sure what would be compelling about the proposed one? Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

 * I prefer the top banner, but to be truthful, it's not that great. It looks a bit hazy. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 00:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Top banner Matroc (talk) 03:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

"Do" section
I moved a bunch of art gallery listings out of "Do" and into "Buy", because galleries are shops. But what should be in "Do"? One possible activity is to attend a service at a synagogue, but synagogues are already covered in "See". Study is another activity, but it's covered in "Learn". Are there any notable hikes, bike rides or what have you? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Safed


text:
Talk:Sagar Island

Thanks for the detils for ganga Sagar. I will be oblige if some one inform me about the returning from ganga Sagar. Is it possible to finish the visit in 12 hrs.? At what time the last ferry /steamer available from Sagar, in the evening? E-mail : narendra1008@gmail.com Regards, Narendra Shah

title: Talk:Sagar Island


text:
Talk:Sagarmatha National Park

As a region this is effectively identical to Everest and should be redirected there, methinks. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:54, 4 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Bump. The article even says "Detailed information regarding the attractions to be found within this park are well documented in the Khumbu article." now -- so why not redirect to Khumbu? (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:02, 3 November 2006 (EST)

 * The SN Park is included within Khumbu, but they do not exactly overlap - Khumbu is a larger. However, any info for the park will be covered in the Khumbu article. So, yes, a redirect it is. (WT-en) WindHorse 04:56, 3 November 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Sagarmatha National Park


text:
Talk:Sagogn

Comments
Could somebody rotate the picture in 'DO' as I don't know how, any queries just post here and I'd be happy to answer

title: Talk:Sagogn


text:
Talk:Sail rock

Err. This isn't really an article, but it's good info that would be a shame to throw away. Should it go to Wikiscuba instead? (WT-en) Jpatokal 13:47, 25 September 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Sail rock


text:
Talk:Saint Andrews (New Brunswick)

Disambig?
Is this a candidate for a disambiguation page with St. Andrews? (WT-en) Jonboy 12:52, 13 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Saint Andrews (New Brunswick)


text:
Talk:Saint-Barthélemy

Headline text
hi

The following is untrue

"Accidents are quite common, almost yearly, and while most of the times the passengers get away with just a few bruises, 3 years ago one of the planes crashed while attempting to land and all the passengers died, including the pilot who was very well known in the St. Barth community."

Crashes are very rare, and no-one to my knowledge has ever been injured on landing during any incident. There was an Air Caraibes plane that crashed prior to landing in 2001, I reiterate well before the landing and while the causes are still unknown, had nothing to do with the landing conditions at the airport since the plane didn't even get there far!

This is a travel website, so why scare off potential visitors with half-truths?

VFD Discussion

 * Merge and redirect. Saint Barthélemy and Saint-Barthelemy appear to be the same Caribbean island.--(WT-en) Bill in STL 02:04, 24 September 2010 (EDT)

Result: Merge tag added for Saint-Barthelemy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:57, 9 October 2010 (EDT)

Merge Gustavia?
Why does Gustavia have its own article if it has no listings and the listings for Gustavia are in this article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 * It was created by an IP editor back in 2006, with contributions from an other IP in 2009. Seems no logged-in regular has added text, just templates and pagebanner. I suppose it could be merged to here. Most of the content is about Saint-Barthélemy in general rather than the town, anyway. –LPfi (talk) 16:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that background. I feel like I'd like some more opinions before acting. La petite française, what do you think? And anyone else? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I could see two solutions: we merge the article or we develop Gustavia page. As it is now, the page could easily be merged indeed. La petite française

 * OK. Thanks for your input. I may start doing a merge as soon as tomorrow unless someone objects in the interim. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint-Barthélemy


text:
Talk:Saint Cloud (Minnesota)

Rename
There are a few other St. Clouds, so I think this should be renamed St. Cloud (Minnesota). (WT-en) Sumone10154 23:11, 5 January 2011 (EST)

 * Done. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:49, 6 January 2011 (EST)

title: Talk:Saint Cloud (Minnesota)


text:
Talk:Saint Croix

Much of the "Buy" section reads like advertising, especially when one paragraph ends with "...come see us." Can someone knowledgeable about the island edit/improve it?

title: Talk:Saint Croix


text:
Talk:Saint-Denis (disambiguation)

Which Saint Denis is more famous?
When I think "Saint Denis," I think of the famous suburb of Paris where the first Gothic cathedral was built to the calculations of the Abbot Suger. Are we sure which one is most famous? Admittedly, this is not a question of crucial importance, but I was a bit surprised that a conclusion had been drawn somewhere along the line. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 02:30, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

 * I only know the Parisian suburb, never knew there was another Saint Denis. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 02:44, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

 * Shall we repoint the disambiguation? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint-Denis (disambiguation)


text: Talk:Saintes Maries de la Mer

title: Talk:Saintes Maries de la Mer


text:
Talk:Saint Gallen

Taken from the Saknt-Gallen page
''If anyone cares to dig through this... even though it looks a bit like a CopyVio...'' -- (WT-en) Ilkirk 16:58, 17 July 2006 (EDT)

The main urban centre of eastern Switzerland, ST GALLEN is a relaxed and conservative provincial city set amidst rolling countryside between the Appenzell hills to the south and the Bodensee to the north. It’s a gentle place, with a busy modern centre and a beautiful Old Town, and is worth a night or two on a journey through the region. The city’s centrepiece is an extraordinarily lavish Baroque abbey: the cathedral is impressive enough by itself, but the abbey library is celebrated as Switzerland’s finest secular Rococo interior and contains a world-class collection of ancient books and manuscripts.

Arrival, orientation and information St Gallen’s train station is 200m southwest of the Old Town, with the tourist office opposite at Bahnhofplatz 1a, on the far side of the square as you emerge (Mon–Fri 9am–noon & 1–6pm, Sat 9am–noon; 071/227 37 37, www.stgallen-i.ch). As well as providing maps and guidance for the city, staff can supply information on the whole Ostschweiz region. In their Tourist Information booklet you’ll find various discount vouchers for, amongst other things, the Appenzeller Volkskunde Museum in Stein, and the Säntis cable-car. The two-hour guided city walking tour starts from the tourist office, and takes in the Textilmuseum, cathedral, abbey library and bits of the Old Town (June–Sept Mon, Wed & Fri 2.30pm; Fr.15).

St Gallen is a stop on the summer rock-festival circuit, with the Open Air festival taking place over the last weekend in June and pulling in a varied range of musical attractions – 1999 attendees included Van Morrison, Blondie, the Asian Dub Foundation and Metallica. Information and tickets can be had from the tourist office, or from a dedicated hotline (071/222 21 21, www.openairsg.ch).

title: Talk:Saint Gallen


text:
Talk:Saint-Gervais-les-Bains

Small ski resort and summer walking resort in the French Alps.

Situated immediately west of the Mt Blanc massive in a side valley about 4km from the A41 Motorway and TGV (mainline) station at La Fayet.

Originally a Victorian Spa town but baths are now lower down at La Fayet. Has an old centre with miture of small cafes restaraunts shops etc. Plenty of small hotels, apartments and houses provide accomodation in the town (which straggles a bit) and in the area.

Cable car situated in huge car park about 1km from the centre of town. This takes you up to La Bettex (more hotels, snack bars and apartments and smaller car park) where main ski runs end. (although it is possible to ski back to bottom station for some of the season). From here main gondola or chair lifts take you to Mt d' Arbois and the slopes which lie between St Gervais and Megeve including Mt Joux. Most of the slopes have open aspect and present no particular difficulties.

The east facing slopes give fine views of Mt Blanc above the Glacier de Bionnassay, Aiguille de Gouter, Aiguille de Bionnassay and Domes de Miage.

During the summer these slopes provide fine walking with grassy ridges and fine views. Mt Joly is one of the most popular destinations.

A rack railway climbs from La Fayet via St Gervais towards Mt Blanc. It stops at le Nid d'Aigle; a viewpoint over the Glacier de Bionnassay.

We need to populate this entry
This destination is barely even an outline, and this discourages contributions. But it's a significant resort, and distinct from Chamonix. I've started to build it but with limited knowledge of the area, and for a first attempt formats and French accents will have to wait. Others please weigh in if you know the place better. Grahamsands (talk) 20:58, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint-Gervais-les-Bains


text:
Talk:Saint Helena (island)

For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Saint Helena (island)/CIA World Factbook 2002 import -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:04, 30 Dec 2005 (EST) -

External photolink: http://www.thefamilia.info/St_Helena_Island/aaa_St_Helena_Island.htm

Dont know what the copyright on these is, check this before copying any photos up. However it was put in the article by someone! (WT-en) Tsandell 14:49, 30 May 2006 (EDT)

Hi there. I took the photos on that site (you can get hold of me at Capetonian@CapeTown.dj). You're welcome to use them so long as you give credit via a link to the site.

I've been to St. Helena, many thanks to this article. It IS a usable article (although it requires some minor upgrades) (WT-en) Maloff 17:42, 23 May 2010 (EDT)

Moved business
From Moonbeams, a shop in St. Helena: we keep adding our details under "Buy" using the "Add Listing" dialogue. It is included on the page and then removed by someone else. Why is that? If we are not permitted to add a listign why is the Add Listing link there? Please could someone explain (email is digital@moonbeamsforall.com) (WT-en) Moonbeamsshop 05:24, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
 * Please see User talk:(WT-en) Moonbeamsshop (WT-en) jan 05:33, 5 August 2010 (EDT)
 * I have now re-inserted it and apologise for the way you were given the run around before and the fact the removing editor did not offer you an explanation here on this page. Please do not let this negative experience put you off contributing again to this new Wikivoyage site . -- A l i c e ✉ 08:07, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Article status
copied from Wikivoyage talk:Article status:

Philippines, along with several others, was just demoted from "usable" to "outline". OK, maybe it does not meet the criteria for usable, but it seems distinctly silly to me to label a rather large and detailed article as an "outline". The TOC shows 20-odd sections and most contain at least a paragraph. If anything, the article is too large and needs sections like History cut to a summary, rather than being too small and needing filling in, which is what I think ""outline" means,

I think we need to change the term. I'm not sure if we also need to revise the criteria. Pashley (talk) 21:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I don't see the problem. The status doesn't cover just the article Philippines, but covers the "Travel guide to the Philippines" as a whole, including underlying cities and destinations. It's been a practice here for quite a while. If just the page itself is good, but underlying destinations are lacking, it'd be strange to call the guide to Philippines "usable". Me and JuliasTravels spent a lot of time getting the Netherlands to a proper usable level, it'd be strange if we'd just consider the country page itself now (that would mean hundreds of countries would be bumped to "usable" level without having the required content in underlying articles). Globe-trotter (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

These have been very educational comments for me. I think they would be for many other editors too, not just casual editors, and I am wondering if either of you would care to place a prominent notice on the discussion page at each of the articles demoted, firstly by way of explanation and secondly as a spur to encourage the development of the linked articles that will need upgrading before the countries can be promoted? (I don't feel qualified to do this myself.)

 * On a linked issue, may I enquire about St Helena, Globe-trotter? The edit summary was "downgraded to outline -- with only one place to go, this island does not have a valid regional structure" Assuming that you are talking about Jamestown (Saint Helena) as being the "one place to go", I fear that you are misunderstanding that St Helena is not really a region. It is an island nation of some 4000 souls that is no less a nation than Liechtenstein, Andorra, the Holy See or San Marino. In fact, due to its extreme isolation, I would argue that it is even more of a nation than any of those. It certainly has the trappings of nationhood such as its own flag, anthem, banknotes (the insertion of this URL was blocked by the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist:www.banknotes.com/sh7.htm), long history and internet TLD. However, since it is only about 16 by 8 kilometres and the terrain is rugged, St Helena does not (and is unlikely to ever have) several settlements worthy of their own articles. It is for these reasons that I intend to move the very little information at Jamestown (Saint Helena) that is not already on the island article to our St Helena article and then make a re-direct from Jamestown (Saint Helena) to St Helena. I shall then (after a few copy edits) promote St Helena to Usable status, but I would welcome your comments in case I have missed something important here. -- A l i c e ✉ 22:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Yes, that would be fine of course. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint Helena (island)


text:
Talk:Saint John

This is an excellent work! Really a well-done guide! (WT-en) Majnoona 23:47, 25 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Pictures
Wow this article needs some color.

I will probably be going back to SJ for a couple weeks later this year. Any suggestions on subjects for photographs that coudl be added to the article? If we can come up with some places I will get them.

(WT-en) Magu2k

 * I have some pictures of the reversing falls but didn't put them up because I am not real happy with their quality. Maybe I will put one up anyway until some better pictures are available. As for subjects: don't stress it, as long as you have a digi just shoot everything in sight and choose a couple that turn out the best ;)

 * BTW: you can sign your posts with 4 tildes (ie: ~ ) -- (WT-en) bulliver 00:38, 21 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Saint John


text:
Talk:Saint Julians

Merge to Sliema?
Should this be merged to Sliema, which is right next door? (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:52, 7 January 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Saint Julians


text:
Talk:Saint Kitts and Nevis

Would this source be useful for cruise specific information? (the actual St. Kitts and Nevis article consists of factbook information, but there is some background and general stuff on the website): Sailingahead.com - Explore the World Offshore

Would it be better to have a seprate page for Nevis? I'm living on Nevis for 2 months and would like to add more information about it but most of the page seems to be about St Kitts. July 5th 08

Should Basseterre continue to have its own article?
Right now, it does, but this article nevertheless has a bunch of specific listings on it. Nevis has a single article. It looks like it would make sense for Saint Kitts to have a single article, but for the article for the entire federation to have no specific listings. What do you think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * It seems to me that each island has a region and a city article. Should we perhaps remove the island article and have a region article for the whole country, with no listings in it, and then as the destinations underneath have the 2 city articles? --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 13:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't really cut it down to one single article for the whole country. I'd suggest one bottom-level article for each island and possibly a separate article for Basseterre. Just as it is now (Charlestown (Saint Kitts and Nevis) redirects to Nevis). ϒpsilon (talk) 14:13, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Oh, Charlestown is a redirect. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 14:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Either way, don't specific listings have to be moved or removed from this article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Yes, I think so. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 15:34, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Yes, listings should definitely be moved into lower level articles. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint Kitts and Nevis


text:
Talk:Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!

I'll have to confess that when I first saw this, I thought Evan had flipped a bit after working on ja-wikivoyage too hard, but evidently this is a real place after all. :boggle: (WT-en) Jpatokal 13:38, 21 Jun 2005 (EDT)

title: Talk:Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!


text:
Talk:St. Louis Metro East

Comments
This page is not displaying the breadcrumb up to illinois, though it has an IsPartOf template. Other pages such as city Alton (Illinois) breadcrumb points back to Saint Louis Metro East but then does not go up to next level Illinois. (WT-en) Bill in STL 13:35, 23 July 2010 (EDT)

 * It should be OK now. There are a number of reasons why the breadcrumb can break, but the most common is generally due to caching issues.  To clear the cache for an article you can click on the "History" tab and then in the resulting URL, change "action=history" to "action=purge".  The resulting page should result in the cache being cleared. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:51, 23 July 2010 (EDT)

Article name
Is it correct to spell out the word "saint" in full here? The city itself is always spelled in the abbreviated form. Eco84 (talk) 18:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I did a quick Google search for "Saint Louis Metro -wikipedia", and most of the results just use "St.". It's been years, and there are no objections, so I'll go ahead and move the guide. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 10:20, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If you rename a region please change the IsPartOf parameter of the city articles in the region. Thanks --Traveler100 (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Louis Metro East