text:
Talk:Ohio state parks

Deletion nomination
Archiving discussion from Project:Votes for deletion page:

Ohio Lodges and State Parks
This doesn't seem like a destination or particularly useful travel topic to me. (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:58, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

 * (from:reasons for deletion) they don't fit in with our goals for making a free, complete, up-to-date and reliable travel guide. I am not quite sure how this misses the goal?? > Ohio has thousands of acres of State Parks with camping, bridle paths and so on. There are also at least 4 major State Lodges/Resorts with hotels attached, golf course, lakes and forests, hostels. They accomodate families or business meetings. I would think this information would be beneficial to any visitor to Ohio looking for adventure, lodging or reading a travel guide. Let the voting begin. (WT-en) 2old 12:35, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Keep. They are destinations since You Can Sleep There (TM). The information might well be useful to some travellers. I'm not sure they need their own article, perhaps just a paragraph in the Ohio article like the description of Dak Bungalows in India. People who know the region can discuss that; I have no clear opinion. (WT-en) Pashley 20:35, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Ohio after copying in the information. It's good information to have, but an article collating it doesn't fit smoothly into our geographical hierarchy.  Another possibility would be to redo this as an itinerary. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 09:40, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Keep. Travel topics aren't supposed to fit into the geographical hierarchy, nor are they supposed to be "destinations." An itinerary would be odd, because I don't think anyone would want to "tour" all of Ohio's lodges in one trip. I can see no reason to delete, and a simple link from the Ohio page condenses information nicely. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:46, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Merge and redirect. I think this is exactly the kind of information that we want in the regular destination guides, either under "sleep" for smaller parks, or as their own articles. --(WT-en) Evan 14:13, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
 * This information certainly should be in the destination guides, but don't we often duplicate content from destination guides in travel topics, as a way to group similar information? That's certainly what we have done with Waterfalls, for example. And if I were to, say, create a travel topic "Jazz clubs in Chicago," that would certainly duplicate listings information from the Chicago district articles, but wouldn't it still be a valid travel topic? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:03, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Travel topics like Waterfalls and Scuba diving serve people who think "gee, I like waterfalls/scuba diving, where should I go?": they have pointers to places that have 'em, and then detailed information is in those places. For example, Scuba diving has a one-liner that says Bunaken is great, and dive resorts, sites and conditions are described in detail in Bunaken.

 * So I think that "State parks in Ohio" would be borderline acceptable as a list of pointers, but "Lodges in state parks in Ohio" just hides the information, because a) anything listed there is not visible elsewhere, and b) as an non-Ohioan I'd have absolutely no idea how to get to (say) Maumee Bay or Salt Fork, because there's no "Get in" to guide me. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:14, 13 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Split or merge – I think an article for Ohio State Parks could be okay, we've got several ones for countries like African National Parks and Indian national parks. Of course we could also just leave them in Ohio's district articles and list a few of the most famous ones on the main Ohio page under "Other destinations", which is a little more in line with what I think we've been doing. But I don't think it hurts to have one for Ohio like this either. The lodges however, I think should be moved to and only listed in the relevant articles for the places they're in or near. We wouldn't create Hotels in California, would we? I think it's unnecessary to expect people to look for lodges in a separate article. If for some reason there's a consensus to keep both in a travel topic form, then I definitely think they should be split into separate articles, it's feels a little weird to lump them together like this. And either way, I also think it's more important to have them listed in the appropriate district articles, which at a glance they don't seem to be – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:34, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

 * OK folks. So far I have been the only contributor to this page. What you do not seem to understand is that the Lodge or State Park it is located in, is the destination. They are located in very rural ares, near very small towns, with no where to sleep, they also are big enough to overlap "districts/counties", in many cases. Placing the State Parks in “sleep���, would ignor all of the amenities that would get you there. I have to discount any opinion that (WT-en) Jpatokal may have, as he marked the page for deletion when only four items had been added. He is correct that there is no description of how to get in. I have not gotten that far. I as a contributor/traveler really have no interest in geographical hierarchy. I am trying to find information of somewhere I would like to visit easily. You have a very good site started here, if you continue to adress problems like this, in this manner, it is going to take (WT-en) Jpatokal a long time to fill up all of the pages. When the deletion notice went up, it gave 14 days for completion. It would have been a better idea to mention what the problem was, rather than butchering a “travel topic” that lacks defintion. A Travel Topic of California’s Lodges and State Parks, seems like something I would read, however I would not add hotels to that. I thought this to be the type of information you needed. There certainly is nothing in it for me, so I will move on to something else while you folks figure it out during the remainder of this 14 day period. Clearly by the votes and comments so far, you have not figured it out either. (WT-en) 2old 11:08, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Keep Looks like a good travel topic to me. We have others like this, not for states, but why not. We can use the related tag to direct people to it. I think we should give it a chance. I am sure there are a lot of travelers would be interested in the collection of information. I know for sure that travelers looking for state parks and lodges would not think it would be great to plow through all the hierarchy to find them. If we don't have it, I would go to the states travel site. I might suggest that they be grouped in the article by region and that might be helpful to the traveler looking for these in the area they are visiting. This is for sure the type of information that is needed in Wikivoyage and I don't think anyone wants to delete it. It is just a matter of where we are going to put the information. I suggest, leave it where it is. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 20:36, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
 *  Keep - see comment below. As long as they meet the general criteria for independent articles according to the What is an article policy, I quite like the idea of having somewhat eccentric topics. And, hey, this is something that Wikivoyage can/should real excel in, because unlike printed guides we have unlimited space. However, having said that, the info included in such articles should be a supplement to the  regular city/region articles, not a substitute.  (WT-en) WindHorse 00:18, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Keep. I agree that this information would fit better into our current hierarchy if it was added to individual guides, but I'd rather see us encourage an enthusiastic contributor who is adding useful information instead of saying "that doesn't fit so let's get rid of it".  Let's let the article grow and revisit this discussion in the future when we either a) have a very useful article that can also be mined to help populate other articles or b) have an incomplete article that still contains a bunch of useful information that can be merged into other articles. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:21, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

 * I'm still not convinced that this makes sense as it's own article. I'm all for eccentric travel topics and all, but I don't think this even fits under that. In fact I don't think this is a travel topic at all. This is an attempt to reorganize information on places to see and sleep in a really odd way, or at least in a way that isn't consistent with how the rest of Wikivoyage is being organized. If this was stuff that didn't fit within our usual style of structuring articles then fine, but I can't see why it's exceptional in any way. We've managed to make guides to the other 49 states without grouping see and sleep listings like this, so why is Ohio any different? Again, I wouldn't be against a separate article that lists and has pointers to the state parks (like Ohio State Parks), but leaving this one as is would be setting a precedent that, to me anyway, leads to chaos in the way we organize things. Can anyone give even one example of a lodge that doesn't fit nicely into a region article or the "get out" section of a city/town article? Deer Creek, for instance, is only 30 minutes outside of Columbus, and can be (and is) listed in Columbus. Any of the lodges that are within a state park should just be listed in the article for that state park. If lodges are really something to behold in Ohio then a paragraph about it on Ohio would make sense, leaving the actual listings in the relevant articles as we always do. I don't want to discourage an enthusiastic contributor at all, but as we do with many others, we should be guiding them towards placing their enthusiastic info into the appropriate places, as we do all the time. So after more thought, my vote is to create Ohio State Parks and merge the lodges into the appropriate articles – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:44, 15 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Yeah, Cacahuate makes some good points. I assumed that Ohio Lodges are a something special that people might specifically seek out as places to stay, such as, perhaps, mansion houses in the UK, palaces in India or log cabins in Yukon (sorry for the stereo types!). If not, then they should be merged into the appropriate city or regional article and perhaps 2old could offer his expertise in doing that. Ohio State Parks should, however, be an independent travel topic article. In short, keep if the lodges are something unique that might be specifically sought out (perhaps under the simpler title of 'Ohio Lodges'). Merge if they are not, but Keep Ohio State Parks. (WT-en) WindHorse 02:07, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Delete the page, however, move the content. Specifically, I'd move the content to the regional guides under the "Other Destination" header.  Redirecting the page doesn't make a whole lot of sense, because there's no way we can redirect the page to multiple guides.  As best as I can recall, I've only visited two state parks – Stone Lick  and Little Miami Bike Trail.  Ohio has 74 state parks and one guide is not the place to list all 74 state parks and describe activities and lodging that's available at each and every park.  I'd also suggest creating a few articles for the parks that deserve an article, otherwise they deserve an honorable mention in the nearest destination's guide. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 23:52, 15 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Keep as Ohio State Parks. Once there is enough info on a given park to justify a separate article, do that. At some point this process may reduce this article to an overview/index article, but for now it is better to have info here than to create many two-line park articles. Link to this, and maybe to the most important parks, from Ohio and to park articles from nearby cities as well as from here. An overview of lodges here is fine, but put info on specific lodges under the relevant park, either in a separate article or a section of this one. (WT-en) Pashley 22:43, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

 * I think an "Ohio State Parks" guide is useless. It doesn't help the traveler.  Any such article would not be helpful because it would not be easy for the traveler to easily determine in which region of Ohio the park is in – that's why it's best to delete the article, and move information to Ohio's regional and county guides under the "Other Destination" header.  That way, when a traveler is stuck in some shithole village he/she can look up the guide to the county and see that Ohio State Park X is in the same county. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 22:56, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

 * The only way I see the article to be useful is if it's just an overview with pointers... I think it's much more important for the info to be in the actual guides... the appropriate region article or the "get out" section of the nearest likely town. Something similar to African National Parks or Indian National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, which are basically just an organized list... and a one liner about the park could be added. I suppose this could be helpful to someone wanting to figure out what's available national park-wise in Ohio, but beyond that, the actual info should be in the same places that we always put this stuff. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 23:15, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

 * I basically agree with Cacahuate, but have to disagree with Andrew—it would at least be useful to (WT-en) this traveler. I know on my fairly recent month-and-a-half long beard-growing travels throughout Nevada, Utah, Arizona, and Colorado one of the first questions that came up in my mind was, "which State parks warrant visits?" To some extent we can cover this sort of question in the state "Other destinations" section, but in practice travel guides just point you toward the big national attractions. I think that this article should restrict itself to brief overviews of linked destinations (they should have their main entries solely within the hierarchy, so that we don't have to maintain double entries), but I definitely like having travel topics sort out, well, travel topics so that an interested traveler can figure out what is important within that topic without having to navigate the entire regional hierarchy just looking for, say, park information. A good example of how this sort of an article is this one little park in Connecticut, Devil's Hopyard State Park, that has a beautiful waterfall. A waterfall fan like myself would waste a lot of time trying to find this by trying to wade through the hierarchy, and it is probably too small and unimportant to list under "Other destinations" for the state page, but an entry on a "state parks" travel topic could point me there with, " Devil's Hopyard State Park — a nice little park with one of CT's prettiest waterfalls."

 * On another note, I think we are probably only having this discussion because we haven't come close to consensus on understanding what our travel topics actually are. Right now, the only "consensus" is that they constitute some sort of "leftover article" category. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:31, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Wow. Sorry for being such a brain drain. My main reasons for participation are 1. I enjoy it. 2. I own a business and employ five other computer users. When I am doing this, they all think I am busy and leave me alone. Works great. Back to the issue. I have viewed a number of State pages. It is apparent you are lacking a plan for State Parks, Lodges and Museums. If you choose to leave this information on a page like the one I have created (and maybe wish I had not). I agree with those who think that it should be A. Lodges and then B. State Parks and that information should be on the closest hmmm destination. I would also suggest that areas like Washington DC with a lot of Museums, have the museums condensed to a page like this. Make sure you are clear how you want this because I am looking to do the same thing on California and really do not want to stir things up again. I have dropped any idea of doing "Ohio Covered Bridges". To those comparing these to Palaces, No, not quite a Palace. Think, 150-200 room very nice hotel, with bar, pool, meeting rooms located in the middle of a forest, most likely near a beach or lake. And last, some of this thought is determined by the scale on the map you are looking at. I look at the surrounding area of where I am going in detail, very closely before leaving, so I look at the detail. (WT-en) 2old 10:05, 18 June 2007 (EDT)
 * I'm in favor of keeping the list of parks as pointers. Ideally, they should be listed as other destinations on the main article. However, as there are often too many, opening up a separate 'travel topic' for pointers acts as a kind of overflow. As Peter said, many people specifically seek out national parks when they are new to a region and having them listed in this way saves having to search through the hierarchy. I think that we are moving towards a consensus of deleting State Lodges and merging the content. Anyway, 2old, I'm glad that Wikivoyage has provided you with a means to fool your colleagues that you are busy - I like it. Hopefully, they won't stumble across your contributor page! (WT-en) WindHorse 10:39, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

Delete This doesn't seem like a destination or particularly useful travel topic to me. User:(WT-en) XxX 11:58, 02 July 2007 (EDT)

Delete I agree with  that this is not an interesting travel topic -> get ride of it!!! —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Rachel52 (talk • contribs)

 * Bump. This has been under discussion for a lot longer than we usually give our VFDs, but I sure don't see much consensus.  My inclination is to keep it for the time being; it seems to have morphed into a travel topic, in which form it (just barely) meets the criteria for keeping.  Whether it's an "interesting" travel topic or not, IMO, isn't under consideration, since interest is in the eye of the beholder; what counts is whether it fits as a travel topic.  Anybody want to make one last dissent before I archive the incredibly long debate? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:17, 14 July 2007 (EDT)

 * What we need is consensus to keep, which we don't have... so under the "guilty until proven innocent" policy, this would qualify for deletion. Ryan voted to keep based on not scaring off an enthusiastic contributor... and Tom voted to keep it as is, while Sapphire voted to delete it altogether. As above, I vote for extracting the lodges from the page and making sure they're in their appropriate homes (the city/region article that they're in/near), and then moving the article to Ohio State Parks. WindHorse, Pashley, Peter and Jani seem to agree with me on that... we just need someone to take action – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 02:53, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

 * Ok, I went ahead and did all of the work based on what I think the general consensus is... but haven't touched the lodges & state parks article. All of the intro info has been copied into Ohio's Other dest and Sleep sections, and I created Ohio State Parks and copied the list into there. I copied the lodges to Talk:Ohio with a request that someone familiar with Ohio put them in the appropriate city/district articles. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 03:42, 15 July 2007 (EDT)

 * Hmmm. Well, I think this is a good resolution, and with hindsight, this is the way I would have done it. I will complete the text once I find my list again, somehow it's missing and I bet (WT-en) Jpatokal took it. Just kidding. I may have to obtain a new one. The article was never intended to be all that interesting, but informative to the traveler (what the site is for). It's a big old world and there is a lot to enter. So back to work!!! (By the way, some of these parks are located in rural areas, in destinations that have not been created yet. But the intent was to also place them there once the appropriate spot was available.)(WT-en) 2old 11:14, 16 July 2007 (EDT)

 * Yay, I'm glad we came to a peaceful resolution :)  – (WT-en) cacahuate   talk 11:30, 16 July 2007 (EDT)

 * I think you are correct that Jpatokal took the list and, what's worse, he's probably hidden it on one of those lodges. Ha Ha. Good luck reconstructing the article. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:37, 16 July 2007 (EDT)

 * okeedohkee. All lodges have been relocated - All info has been gleaned from Ohio Lodges and State Parks. May it rest in peace. The new page Ohio State Parks is under renovation to comply with the Ohio division by the site map. (can not complete this until I know which county.) I have found my list. On the new page I will be adding the County it is located in, as part of the address. Dunno how anyone would find it without that. (WT-en) 2old 12:34, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Guide status
I have upgraded to guide status per WV:Travel topic status. I may have missed some important information that was omitted, or other missing criteria according to that page, but to me it looks good enough to be a guide article. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 17:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Downgrade to usable?
While this is certainly a good article, unfortunately, I don't agree that a long list should be a guide article. I should be clear, that I don't have an issue with the redlinks here – they can eventually be developed. My primary concern is that there is no generalized information about what you can do as a whole in the state parks in Ohio. As an example, looking at Finnish national parks, it contains a lot of redlinks, but in my opinion, it is much more useful than this article, because it tells what a traveler can do in Finnish national parks, information about eating and drinking, sleep information and general etiquette in national parks albeit it only being usable which I have been using as inspiration in developing Tasmanian national parks. However, on the other hand, this article doesn't seem to have any of it, and only lists what facilities there are in each park. I don't deny to all the contributors of this article that you've done a good job, but it needs more work to become a guide article IMO. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

 * It is also worth noting that the article has just been slushed for ftt by . SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:51, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ohio state parks


text:
Talk:Ohio Valley

This region contains the following counties:

 * Brooke
 * Calhoun
 * Hancock
 * Jackson
 * Marshall
 * Ohio
 * Pleasants
 * Ritchie
 * Roane
 * Taylor
 * Wetzel
 * Wirt
 * Wood

(WT-en) Fastestdogever 09:56, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Ohio Valley


text:
Talk:Off-highway vehicle riding in Oregon

Could there be some explination about what OHV Riding is as part of this article? I dont have a clue, but is look like it would be a good travel topic Thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona 14:09, 10 March 2006 (EST)

 * WikiPedia:All-terrain vehicle says it's an Off Highway Vehicle which is a category that includes ATVs, Motorcyles, and Jeeps. -- (WT-en) Colin 14:24, 10 March 2006 (EST)


text:
Talk:Oise

Compiègne
According to Compiègne, Compiègne is in this department. Joan of Arc was captured outside of this town in 1430, before being tried and executed in Rouen (see Joan of Arc). (WT-en) AnnaKucsma 11:44, 1 November 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Oise


text:
Talk:Oita

Is this page about OITA CITY? It is confusing because there is the Oita (prefecture) wikivoyage page and then this page, which lists many other locations in Oita Prefecture so it doesnt seem to be just about Oita City. I am going to try to put the general information about other parts of Oita Prefecture on the "prefecture page" and make this the "Oita City" page.

 * The very first line says "Oita (大分市 Oita-shi) is the capital city of Oita prefecture", so I don't see how that could be confusing.  It would be reasonable to list attractions that are near Oita, would logically be visited from Oita, and have no other city article to call home. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 13:59, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Its confusing because even if the page were supposed to be about OITA PREFECTURE it would not be strange that the opening line is: Oita (大分市 Oita-shi) is the capital city of Oita Prefecture. If I look on a page about any geographic location it most likely would start by specifying a central point in that location.
 * And obviously its confusing because the name OITA specifies both the city and the prefecture. Whats the problem with being clear and calling one page Oita City and another Oita Prefecture? —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Walkietalkie123 (talk • contribs)

 * Take a look at Talk:Japan (which in turn derives from Project:Naming_conventions). In short, because this comes up for most of the prefectures in Japan, "the city gets X and the prefecture gets X (prefecture). So now we have Kumamoto and Kumamoto (prefecture)."  It's a matter of consistency, applied to every such article in Japan, and this means we don't have to run around renaming articles to Osaka City and Tottori City and so forth.
 * Do note that there is a redirect in place for Oita City, so if you search for that, it'll take you immediately to the appropriate article. The breadcrumb navigation at the top also makes it clear how the hierarchy falls.   - (WT-en) Dguillaime 00:26, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oita City Museum.jpg

title: Talk:Oita


text:
Talk:Okayama

I see we have a Japanese class working on this article again. Sensei, please clean up after your students and make sure the stuff they add is both perfect English and relevant to the travel guide... (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:34, 4 August 2006 (EDT)

usable?
I've been adding to the article, and I'd like to get its status up to at least a usable, does anyone think it's ready yet? If it is, who changes it, and if it isn't what specificly needs to be added/changed?

 * Anybody can, just read through Project:Article status and see if you think it's up to scratch. I think it's OK contentwise, although the formatting (eg. the restaurant listings in Eat) needs some work. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:35, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

sugei?
Actually, even in Tokyo, it's common for men to say suge- instead of sugoi. I'd only consider this dialect if the women do it too... (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:37, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

Street names
There are numerous factual errors with regards to place names. Momotaro info box: Momotaro Odori is not the main shopping street. Momotaro Odori may be the financial center and host to all the banks, but it has very few retail stores. Buy: Okayama Shopping Street is probably a reference to the Omotecho shopping mall. There are several similar shopping arcades in Okayama, including one on either side of Okayama station. (One gets a passing mention in the "Sleep" section!) Listing only one is at best misleading. Do: Momotaro Festival has not been held on "(where else) Momotaro Odori" for several years. The center of the Momotaro/Uraja festival(s) is nearer city hall and the Sega Joypolis on Shiyakusho-suji (the avenue running from Okayama Station to City Hall.) Get in: Okayama is served by several international routes. Only domestic flights are listed. Get around: There are two tram lines, not one as indicated.

 * Please plunge forward! (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:58, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for your encouragement Jpatokal. I have edited, added and deleted as I felt necessary. Hope it helps.

Technical Problem
I recently placed the sites under the "Culture Zone" into the proper formatting however, I noticed that Korakuen Garden and Okayama Castle cannot be edited by clicking the "edit" button (unlike the other listings). I looked to see if something was wrong, but I can't seem to find any errors. I am having the same problem on the Tsuyama page with most of the entries.

I am wondering if it has something to do with my method of adding them (I copied the formatting and then moved everything into the proper place from the general editing page, because it was easier... But that doesn't explain why it works for the rest...

Is there an error here (or with the sites I put on the Tsuyama page)? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:15, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

 * It appears to be a site bug - placing non-Latin text in the alt box (and possibly other locations) makes it uneditable with that script. Removing the kanji makes it editable again.  I've submitted a bug report over on Shared.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 00:54, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Chain restaurants
Since the Eat listings are in much better shape now, I'm moving these three out of the article, since they're both national chain restaurants (one international as well). (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:26, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

 * A MacDonalds just like any other, serving their famous Big Macs and burgers, as well as the special Japanese meals, like teriyaki burgers and ebi (shrimp) burgers.

 * Japan's very own fast food chain. It's slightly more expensive than MacDonalds, and portions are smaller, but delicious nonetheless.

 * Home to some of Japan's best curry, it's a great choice for those who want delicious food for less money. Be aware that, unlike many Japanese curries, the spicier curries are in fact, spicy.

Hotel listings
As above, I'm moving this one out of the article, since it has no description, it's well out of the city center, and the article is now full of listings. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:02, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

 *

We don't have a description for this one, and I can't find anything online other than its basic existence. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:40, 27 July 2009 (EDT)

 *

Ryokan Matsunoki
Update on removing Ryokan Matsunoki: I have removed the mentioning of the Matsunoki-ryokan after having slept there 2 nights. The service and quality is very poor, the food is bad and in the lunchroom (which is in fact a part of the basement) the local building-constructionworkers smoke heavily while the hotelguests are having breakfast and / or dinner. The rooms and corridors smell heavily of smoking. The electrical system in the rooms is unsafe. The service is extremely unfriendly: after having tried dinner I decided to return the vouchers for the remaining breakfasts and dinners and the people didn't even want to know why. I had the impression I was not the first one and they just don't care. In the direct neighbourhood are many good places to stay overnight and to eat, so I want to save other visitors for this place. [P.S. I did not know how to connect this comment to the removing of the ryokan, so I wrote it here. AV] —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 210.237.204.26 (talk • contribs)

 * I've never been there myself, but the Matsunoki listing dates back to 2006 — one of the first listings added to the article. Does anyone else have personal experience with the ryokan? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 20:43, 13 April 2010 (EDT)

Push for Star
I think this article is pretty close to being a star, with unparalleled depth of knowledge about Okayama. To my eye, it would need:

 * Addresses for some of the 'See' listings
 * Finish off the eat/drink descriptions
 * Finish off the descriptions for the entries towards the end of 'Do'
 * Map for the Kibi plain (probably wouldn't need to be street-level — just an area overview)

(WT-en) Gorilla Jones 01:36, 27 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I will try to work on some of this (I've already started, actually. All listings in the "Culture Zone" are now complete.) (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:33, 29 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Great prose - especially at the start!
 * I've tried to help with a bit of trivial copy editing today... --118.93nzp (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Better late than never, but I've completed all of these tasks (well, I didn't make my own Kibi Plains map, but they are all marked on the geomap). I will look the first few sections and may nominate soon. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 16:10, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Fruit Farm Link
It looks like the Kubo Fruit Farm staff noticed it on the page, they've linked back to us on their English page. Kind of cool, eh? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:33, 29 July 2009 (EDT)

Bus
I think the Hareca cards have now completely replaced the prepaid bus cards... can someone confirm this? (WT-en) Muskateer 05:34, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

English speaking guides at Okayama Castle
Really? Can we please have a link to a place that advertises this service? I was personally not aware of this service and am quite surprised. Perhaps the guides are only available at certain times on certain days, or perhaps there is a local volunteer who happens to speak English? (WT-en) Muskateer 05:34, 3 August 2009 (EDT)
 * The English guide was in a booth/info center to the left of the castle. I looked it up, and it appears that they are a volunteer group. They are on Okayama's news page here (2009/06/08). I can add the phone number to the page. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 15:31, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Map feedback
I just scanned through and I have to say the map is only legible if I open the full image in a. Even then it is hard to read.

I would suggest reworking the map since this shouldn't even be a Guide level article without a readable map that can be printed out.

Even a dynamic map would be an improvement. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

 * I think all of the maps are that way. Look at Hiroshima and Hilversum. For me, those maps are also illegible until I click on them, and they are both star articles. Is that what you are referring to?

 * Unless there is a new consensus that I am unaware of, having a map has never been a prerequisite for guide status. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 04:38, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I was wondering why the OSM layer for the dynamic map was changed from:

to use a different layer:

As you can see, there is a substantial difference between the English language detail of each layer...--118.93nzp (talk) 08:20, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Tomata Onsen Noritake
I believe they closed due to bankruptcy, but I'll post the listing here for easy restoration if it should reopen

Tokoen Garden
Tokoen Garden closed after its owner passed away and its fate has yet to be decided. Until then, I'll put the listing here and hope it will be restored:

ChubbyWimbus (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, unless I'm getting confused, I found it the more enjoyable of the two.
 * On a tangent, why do you not use the more common and less ambiguous 24h clock format that is used in print and signs throughout Japan (and most of the world) instead of the ugly, ambiguous and long-winded American format? -- A l i c e ✉ 10:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

 * You mean using 5PM instead of 17:00 (military time)? 5PM is 3 characters compared to 17:00's 5. I don't see how it's "long-winded." That has been the sitewide standard for all locations as long as I remember. It is not a "me" thing or a "Japan guide" thing. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

 * I generally find that several characters are saved in an article when it is converted to the format used by most of the world - eg, 12:30 instead of 12:30PM or 11:25 instead of 11:25AM each saves two characters.
 * Rather than re-invent the wheel, I'll try and sort you out a reference for the other part of the rationale.
 * I take it you don't dispute that it's the "24h clock format that is used in print and signs throughout Japan" ? -- A l i c e <font color="#FF3333">✉ 21:13, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

 * It really doesn't make a difference. We have a single standard sitewide for writing times. This is not a case of the Okayama article being exceptional or of myself going rogue against consensus. You're suggesting we adopt separate time standards for every country which is a policy discussion that if you wish to pursue should be done elsewhere. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

New Star Nomination
I didn't do this initially, but I was told it is part of the nomination process to post here in the pub when a new star is nominated for the community to comment. I have nominated Okayama for star status and would appreciate your comments, critiques, support, etc. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 05:03, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Inujima
I had originally thought that Inujima should get its own article so I didn't put it here however, the island is part of Okayama City, so I'd like to ask how I should deal with it. I think it should be given a subheading for sure, but should I make it a general description with a link to Inujima, the main article or should I write it as the only information about it, with a bit more information for those interested? Although there are a few restaurants and sites, the island is not large, so I'm undecided. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * ChubbyWimbus, another possibility: what about adding it as a subsection in Go next? --Danapit (talk) 17:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure if it's policy or just me, but I've never liked adding locations to "Go Next" that are not clickable. I think every attraction/destination should be placed in a proper article as an attraction. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I don't think there's any such policy. There are some attractions that are too far away to be reasonable to list anywhere but "Go next," but which don't merit their own complete article. Have a look at Xi'an for one such example. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:37, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

 * To me, the pagoda's problem seems to be that we haven't created pages for the nearby locations, as the description lists locations and even another nearby attraction. In the case of Inujima, though, the island is within Okayama City limits, so it could go in this article. As an island, though, giving it its own article would also be reasonable. This is what I'm unsure about. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I see your point. Why not give it its own section here as a "See" or "Do", and then if it seems too long, make it its own article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Inujima
Inujima is a small island in the Seto Inland Sea that was historically used as a place to gather granite to make castle walls, including Okayama Castle and Osaka Castle, and later also built a prosperous copper refinery. After the industries shut down, the island struggled to support its citizens and so joined other islands in the inland sea to become one of the art islands in the Setouchi Art Triennale. Although the Triennale is an exciting time to visit, the art sites can be enjoyed anytime. There are often mini festivals on the island and other special art events on off-years. It's also a popular place for swimming, camping, and kayaking in the summertime. Visitors can travel to Inujima by boat from Hoden Port (buses to the port depart from Saidaiji Station) to visit the art sites and enjoy the beauty of the inland sea. Upon arrival at the port, head straight to the Seaside Inujima Gallery where you can get a map of the island and purchase your ticket to the art sites (including exhibits within the gallery itself). You can also check boat departures going back to the mainland, eat at the cafe, and visit the souvenir shop.

I'm going to put the original text here, because I still have mixed feelings whether or not the Inujima article is warranted. I also think whoever transferred it made the description duller. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Static Map Double
The static map is located both at the top and under the dynamic map. Surely it should only be in one place, right? Is there a policy that dictates which is correct? ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:16, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Closed
Will be greatly missed... ChubbyWimbus (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Okayama


text:
Talk:Okeechobee

''This page is for discussing the corresponding article or guide. For more about using talk pages check out Project:Using talk pages.''

title: Talk:Okeechobee


text:
Talk:Okemo

So it looks like this is a ski resort in the Okemo Valley region. Any objections to moving the guide to that name? (WT-en) Majnoona 17:07, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Okemo


text:
Talk:Okinawa

Thanks Paul for making this a semi-useful page. I am asking some friends to help out filling this thing out more. Many of of them are in the Tourist industry here on Okinawa, but most only speak Japanese. Some are also involved in the external link provided on the main Okinawa page.

Help! How to divide Miyako??
As you may or may not know, it is a common misconception that there's only one island in Miyako, due to the fact that the main island shares its name with the group.

I'm not sure how I should group them though, in preparing to make pages for them.

As you can tell from this map, there are "8 islands". That's if you count the Yabiji and Fudi islands as single islands, which they aren't, but given that their populations are very low and the individual islands are tiny, they're usually not counted by individual islands.

What I'm wondering is, since writings on Iriomote and Ishigaki as individual islands often include stuff about the surrounding islands (not Taketomi or Hatoma, rather those which are close enough to have a bridge), should I lump Ikema, Kurima, Oogami, Fudi, and Yabiji in with Miyako and Shimoji in with Irabu, or should I give each separate consideration? For now, I've linked separately to each. --(WT-en) Node ue 20:35, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Rule of thumb is that if you can sleep there, then it gets its own page. So Iriomote qualifies, but Yubu does not.

 * I would suggest that, initially, you consider Miyako/Ikema/Kurima/etc as one destination and Shimoji/Irabu as another. They can always be split up later if they grow too large. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:44, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Also, we don't have to list every island here, this is just a top-level index of the main points of interest. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:50, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Habu
Changed the bit about habu to be less stupid — the snake can kill in a single bite, so it should not be taken lightly.

Expensive diving
Somebody keeps deleting the price info for diving. If the prices are incorrect, then correct them, but do not just delete the whole section -- the fact remains that diving in Japan is way more expensive than doing so in SE Asia. (WT-en) Jpatokal 19:14, 2 August 2010 (EDT)

Military resentment
Mentioning negative feelings about the U.S. military seems reasonable, but one should strive for accuracy. For example, while there is the perception that soldiers are a significant source of crime, statistically this is not true, so it shouldn't be stated as such. (WT-en) Orcrist 07:58, 12 October 2010 (EDT)

Military resentment addendum: I can attest to this as fact. When I was stationed there for three years, every new edition of the island's Japan Update showed multiple examples of Jappanese/Okinawan-on-Japanese/Okinawan crime; including frequent sexual assault. Military incolvement in this is a vast MINORITY as is the so-called 'resentment'. More practically, it's just aresentment over competition for space on the island more than anything else. Space for business, houseing, recreation, etc. There were protests while I was there, but this represents a minority (Likely fueled by business interests competing for real estate). In fact, the military helps fuel the economy. If there is any blame to be placed, it's the systematic dillution of Okinawan culture by the JAPANESE government. Unfortunately, the younger generations have already been snowed and don't even realize this.

"Mainland Japan"
Last night, I went to a presentation about Okinawa at Japan House in New York, and the Okinawans did refer to the Japanese Home Islands as the "mainland", but that makes little geographic sense. Should we use the expression, or should we refer to the main or home islands? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Airport free shuttle: route
Hi Mrenglishben (or any knowledgeable person): Would you know where the free shuttle go, if it is available to anyone (passenger of any company) and if it requires a reservation? I could not find information about it. Cheers — Fabimaru (talk) 17:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what free shuttle you're referring to. I don't see one described on this page or on Naha. I didn't find anything obvious in an internet search, either. However, I did dig up which led me to the fare tables listed at . If I'm reading those tables right, it seems like every route on the airport limousine bus has free service between the two Naha Airport terminals and Asahibashi station. --Bigpeteb (talk) 17:33, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I was referring to « Naha airport has free transfer ». Thank you a lot for finding that. I don't know if the table means that it's free or if this route is not available. Fabimaru (talk) 22:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Talk section
Am I missing something? Where else do we cover languages in Okinawa? On Japan, which is the only page above this one in the hierarchy, the only thing we say is
 * On the southern islands of Okinawa, many dialects of the closely related Ryukyuan languages are spoken, mostly by the elderly

That's hardly any detail at all. Surely it's appropriate on this page, just as on Hawaii, to give more detail about local languages, and maybe even teach some essentials. --Bigpeteb (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I just moved the existing "Talk" section up. It was previously at the bottom of the article but it's now after "Get Around". Please expand on that if you think there's insufficient detail, but I think two "Talk" sections make the article harder to read. See Okinawa. The dog2 (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Talk, for logical reasons, goes after "Understand". See Country article template and Wikivoyage talk:Region article template. I will move it accordingly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * fffffffffffffffffff.... I see, there already was a Talk section. My bad. In my defense, I looked for it in the normal place and didn't see it, which is why I added a new one. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Adding an extra region
Currently there are 5 regions here but this region structure leaves some destinations breadcrumbed to the prefectural article instead of a smaller region. As places like Kumejima are not covered by any sub region I would like to make an region inspired by this page while excluding Kerama and the Main Island which already have their own article Tai123.123 (talk) 21:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * That links to a 404 error. Try https://www.japan-guide.com/e/e7100.html. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 21:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * forgot the L in html Tai123.123 (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Just found this discussion. I've fixed part of the glitch by adding Kume, Tonaki and Aguni into the Kerama Islands (not strictly correct, but close enough for the traveller's POV). This still leaves Iejima, Iheya and Izena, which should be their own group (IMHO) under Okinawa Island, but none of the three articles exist yet so I'll kick this can down the road for now. Jpatokal (talk) 06:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Cities/Islands -> Destinations
The recent restructuring of Okinawa Island means that many of the "cities" redirect to the same articles now, and nobody goes to Okinawa for the cities anyway. I'd suggest merging these into a list of 9 "destinations", perhaps the following:

 * 1) Irabu - the lesser-known half of Miyako
 * 2) Iriomote - large island full of untamed jungle
 * 3) Ishigaki - the laid-back tropical hub of the Yaeyama Islands
 * 4) Naha - the capital of the Okinawa Prefecture and by far the largest city in the islands
 * 5) Kumejima - beautiful island renowned for its awamori liquor
 * 6) Taketomi - a carefully preserved traditional village and some of the best beaches in Japan
 * 7) Yonaguni - the westernmost island in Japan, with miniature horses and mysterious underwater structures
 * 8) Zamami - popular among snorkelers and divers, with several deserted islands nearby

Do we need a 9th to round this out? The Daitos are already a top-level section, so IMHO they don't warrant two mentions here. Jpatokal (talk) 07:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We should have 7 articles, give or take 2. That doesn't mean 9. It can mean 9, or 5, or 6, or 8, or even 7 just to be crazy. Ground Zero (talk) 20:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've updated the list per above. Jpatokal (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Okinawa


text:
Talk:Oklahoma

"Oklahoma is known as a great place to live but not to visit."

You might wanna take that back!

OKC Zoo: "Top 3 best zoos". Oklahoma: "top 5 places to visit." (Southern Living)

And I live there! ;)

Counties
Can we get rid of the county articles here? Only two of Oklahoma's seven regions are divided into counties, and of those, only five county articles exist. Four of them are essentially empty and list just a city or two. The other, Le Flore County, doesn't have all that much unduplicated info, and could be easily merged into the parent region. Any objections to this? (WT-en) Texugo 22:55, 20 February 2010 (EST)
 * Done. Texugo (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Cities
Broken Arrow or Edmund should probably be removed since both are suburbs of OKC and there are 10 cities. Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 03:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Wineries
This state article had a big list of wineries. I moved all I could to their respective city pages, but the following don't have a city page yet. Texugo (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oklahoma


text:
Talk:Oklahoma City

Districts
I have redirected all the added districts that had mostly copyvio from Wikipedia. I have to admit I do not like the districts the way they are and we do need to come up with a better list. At the same time I would like to see that they stay under the count of nine. Some of the names that were redirected might be able to be used, but at this point I believe we need to discuss the breakdown. Any suggestions? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 21:53, 10 February 2007 (EST)

 * The following is the list of | neighborhoods in Wikipedia;

 * Downtown
 * Central Business District
 * Bricktown
 * Automobile Alley
 * Deep Deuce
 * The Arts District

 * Innercity North
 * Asian District
 * Eastside (area east of the Capitol)
 * 39th Street Enclave
 * The Paseo
 * Uptown and Midtown

 * Innercity South
 * Stockyards City
 * Capitol Hill and Riverside

 * Northside
 * Adventure District
 * Mayfair and Belle Isle
 * Nichols Hills and The Village
 * Quail Springs/Memorial Corridor

 * Westside
 * Meridian Avenue/"West End"

 * Southside
 * I-240 Corridor
 * "Westmoore"/South Oklahoma City

 * Eastside
 * Southeast Oklahoma City

 * The major breaks here look alright and maybe some of the sub-districts deserve separate mention due to the see, do, eat, etc. available. My example would be Bricktown. Also the "Quail Springs/Memorial Corridor" might qualify due to the abundance of shopping venues and restaurants. Nichols Hills and The Village are separate towns and already have their own articles. Does anyone have suggestions? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 07:51, 11 February 2007 (EST)
 * This new map highlight the fact that OKC has not been correctly districted at all, with most of the city falling into gaps between the districts. This whole scheme needs to be redone somehow. Texugo (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah...it'd be good to have someone familiar with the city look through the district division. However I'm afraid it isn't going to happen anytime soon. This discussion is over 7 years old - if it would be a person it would be attending school already :P (Ps. again it's a city I've never been anywhere near, I just used Google Maps, followed the descriptions in the article and some articles on Pedia so the map is probably not perfect). ϒpsilon (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I am very familiar w/ Oklahoma City and the current district listing and the district map is very very wrong. Plaza Court District isn't really a thing (or hasn't been for a very long while). I would be able to help fill in details, but I am a noob at editing and I am having a hard time trying to figure out how to create the district pages, update the district map, etc. This is a great resource, also: http://www.visitokc.com/about-okc/okc-districts/ VS (talk) 18:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Radical proposal on districts
Get rid of them, geotagg listings if at all possible; draw new borders based on that. The existing district layout with redlinks is... Bad... Hobbitschuster (talk) 03:51, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Totally agree the existing district layout is a mess. Putting everything back to one article though would be a lot of listings on a page. How about rationalizing the districts.

Something like this:
 * Inner center - Downtown, Arts District, Bricktown
 * Outer center - Paseo Arts District and most of what is gray on the existing map.
 * North - Adventure District, Asia District, NW 39th Street Enclave, Northwest and some of the unmarked areas around these.
 * South - All south of the river including Capitol Hill Historic District
 * Maybe someone can come up with better names --Traveler100 (talk) 07:05, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

 * FWIW you can read in the thread above how the map came into being in 2014. Existing district articles do seem to have a fair share of listings, so probably the OC article needs some form of districts. But in that case they should cover the whole city. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:24, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Or simply City center (Downtown, Arts District, Bricktown), City North and City South, everything outside the center in one of two articles. (North/South split being Main Street as street number counts out from there, making Riverside in City South). Or would the I40 be a more sensible line for North/South split? --Traveler100 (talk) 13:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but the discussion has stalled, sigh... Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I cleaned up one of the districts for the COTM, and I've just had a look at most of the others. I think that Traveler100 has the right idea.  The districts should be:
 * City center (Downtown, Arts District, Bricktown, and maybe the Capitol area)
 * Northwest: I found a Chamber of Commerce for NW OKC that defines its territory as "more than sixty square miles North of I-40 and West of the Broadway Extension", aka Hwy 77/I-235.  So that's on the current map as including the Northwest, Western Avenue, NW 39th St Enclave, Asia, and Paseo arts districts.
 * Northeast (Adventure district and all that empty gray space around it)
 * South (I-40 would be an easy place to draw the line)
 * If we can manage to get, say, two other people to agree to this, and someone will ping me, then I will try to actually merge the pages later this month. (Someone else may have to draw the map or make some mapshapes, but it should be pretty easy compared to what we've got now.)  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - go for it. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I've given revamping the static map a go after SelfieCity pointed this map out in the Pub. Please notify me if there are any desired changes left to be made to it. Both the SVG and PNG versions are uploaded to Commons if anyone needs to change anything in future. I'm not well-known with Oklahoma and I haven't a clue if the result is what you had in mind. -- Wauteurz (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Such a big improvement! Thank you so much, Wauteurz.  I really appreciate this.  I hope to replace the old map and merge those pages during the next week.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Just a little curious ... could you link to the page where I brought up the static map, anyone? Thanks. I checked, and it was actually WhatamIdoing who pointed this out. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 22:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, and thanks for improving the static map! This one is better than the old one. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 22:50, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I just made a static map (a basic one, that is) and I can understand that it is a lot of work. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 03:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Is the Paseo Arts district (Oklahoma City/Paseo) really part of Oklahoma City/Northwest like the article says? On the map it looks like part of Oklahoma City/Northeast. —Granger (talk · contribs) 03:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you're correct. On that map, it looks like the southwest corner of the northeast section (assuming the markers in the /Paseo district article's dynamic map are correct).  It's probably easier to change the text than the map.  Do you want to do that?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Oklahoma City districts
As one very furtive glance at the page might tell, the districts are a mess. The map contains more gray space (not contained even in proposed districts) than districts and some districts are no more than redlinks. There are thankfully some geotagged listings, but by far not enough to draw district borders just based on that. I have now proposed the radical solution of - at least for now - getting rid of the districts and later maybe drawing new lines. What say ye? Hobbitschuster (talk) 03:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

 * Seems like the best solution for now. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:30, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge away. Or remove the merge tags if you're not going to. Ground Zero (talk) 12:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Where is this currently? Any merge? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 23:45, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Listings need geotagging
I created Oklahoma City/South and I would move listings to this district article and others, but I can't because none of the listings have geotaggs, so I do not know where anything is... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

The mess that is Oklahoma City
I would really like to help moving stuff to district articles and whatnot, but there are just no geotaggs. I recently created Oklahoma City/South because there was a redlink on the main page, but I cannot really move stuff there, because, yaknow... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ye, notices this the other day too. Would be a good cotm candidate. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * @Hobbitschuster, as a first approximation, if the street address has "S" (south) in the street name, then it belongs in the /South district. We drew the dividing line almost exactly where the street addresses change from "N" to "S".  There may be a few "101 S Example St" places that belong to the /Downtown district, but there won't be many of those (especially if you avoid the museums and other major attractions). WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to undo merge with Oklahoma City/NW 39th Street Enclave
I believe visitors to the OKC/NW page and the 39th street enclave are two separate groups, people looking for Oklahoma's largest (and perhaps only) LGBT neighborhood or visitors to one part of OKC. I understand the desire to merge an area with more content into the larger region, but I think it would be a disservice to both groups. Thesagemarmot (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

 * I've moved this comment from Talk:Oklahoma City/Northwest to Talk:Oklahoma City where more people are likely to see it. Pinging User:Vskochcomm, User:Traveler100, and User:WhatamIdoing. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Oklahoma City districts again again
They continue to be a mess years hence. Can someone please do something? I have proposed merging them all back into the city years ago, but quite frankly I'm not sure that would solve anything either... Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Among other things there is a supposed "Asian district" (which redlinks) mentioned in the text of the article but not part of the district hierarchy in any way... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
 * We decided a while ago to merge the many districts into just four. There's a lot of work to be done in the articles anyway, but I think this is manageable. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So what about that redlink? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If it's a redlink and not part of the hierarchy, why not just delink it? Powers (talk) 13:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I was wondering that too, so I just did it. Ground Zero (talk) 13:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It wouldn't make sense to have a redlink for a district we decided not to have.  The other alternative would be redirecting it to the larger district that the Asian district is now part of. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oklahoma City


text:
Talk:Oklahoma City/Quail Springs/Memorial Corridor

I'm not familiar with Oaklahoma City, but we generally don't do second-level sub-districts. Is this supposed to be OK > Quail Springs > Memorial Corridor or OK > Quail Springs/Memorial Corridor? If it's the first, then the districts need to be reevaluated. If it's the second, the name will need to change as "/" is special character for the wiki software. See Project:Article naming conventions for more. (WT-en) Maj 05:11, 10 February 2007 (EST)


text:
Talk:Okutama

D'oh -- this overlaps a bit (but not too much) with Chichibu-Tama-Kai National Park. I'd suggest moving Mitake and adding info on approaches via Okutama to the NP article. (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:04, 18 August 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Okutama


text:
Talk:Olbia

I rolled back the addition of an external guide link; see Project:External links for more info on why. --(WT-en) Evan 09:48, 26 September 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Olbia


text:
Talk:Old Orchard Beach

I have asked user .114 to focus on this one guide until s/he better understands our policies and guidelines. I will keep on eye on MoSing things if needed. Thanks ! (WT-en) Majnoona 10:55, 31 March 2006 (EST)

168 Maj or it 114 anyway iam a he and i will try 169.244.143.114 10:56, 31 March 2006 (EST) the bathroom thing might need to go though... thanks 169.244.143.114 10:56, 31 March 2006 (EST)

169 sorry

title: Talk:Old Orchard Beach


text:
Talk:Old Trafford

Is this an article?
This looks like it would be an attraction in a destination article. Are we doing articles on stadiums now? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel)

Added a merge on this article, it is a stadium and should be merged to the Manchester article and then this article redirected. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 11:20, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

Merge destination
For merging this information with another article, I'd suggest "Old Trafford (district of Manchester)". That way, information about the cricket ground as well as other attractions could be listed. Manchester is a very large city, and adding all the Old Trafford stadium work might make the Manchester article very long. Old Trafford, a district of Manchester, would give a more precise location. (WT-en) Victor Greenstreet 18:18, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Old Trafford


text:
Talk:Oleta River State Park

Oleta River State Park
Per Project:What is an article?; it is not a nationally (in the United States) known park a la New York (city)/Central Park and Yosemite National Park, et. al. (WT-en) THE evil fluffyface 18:22, 29 August 2007 (EDT)
 * What city/town/county article should contain it? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 12:00, 3 September 2007 (EDT)
 * Miami. I've done the redirect, but am leaving this open for discussion a little longer. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:44, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Oleta River State Park


text:
Talk:Olinda

Prices in dollars
I have removed a number of prices listed in US dollars in 2005, as the wild shifts in the exchange rate render these completely unreliable. The prices should be checked again and listed in reais-- we always list prices in the local currency. (WT-en) texugo 11:03, 20 September 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Olinda


text:
Talk:Oliver County

Copied from my talk page to here and the North Dakota talk page. -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:32, 11 Jun 2005 (EDT)

When I first set up the 53 counties of ND, I was finding many names duplicate names of counties in other states. To avoid confusion and duplicate work, I decided to name all 53 as Name County (North Dakota). I realized when I did this that some of the counties were not duplicated in other states and the ND parentheses were not necessary, but it was easier to stick to one naming convention as I wrote the various articles. By changing Oliver County (North Dakota) to Oliver County, this becomes an exception to the naming convention I am using, and will almost certainly lead to errors down the road. Unless there is really a good reason to go changing some of the names and leaving others unchanged, I would like to keep the (North Dakota) in all the county names. Do you see a problem with that? (WT-en) Stavp 17:20, 10 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * According to the Project:Article naming conventions, Oliver County is prefered over Oliver County (North Dakota). I moved this article to Oliver County because of this convention. Should there be more than one Oliver County, this article can always be moved back to . -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:32, 11 Jun 2005 (EDT)

title: Talk:Oliver County


text:
Talk:Ollantaytambo

I have changed this article to outline status, see Project:Article_status. To improve:
 * More Eat/Drink info - place names etc
 * More Sleep info - contact details
 * More Get In info - road? rail?
 * More info for the See listings mentioned - contact details

Theres alot more, but those are the main things that are required for a Usable grading.

(WT-en) Tsandell 13:09, 25 May 2006 (EDT)

The image to the right is not Ollantaytambo, it is Pisac. Mokhin (talk) 14:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ollantaytambo


text:
Talk:Olomouc

restaurant nostalgie in Olomouc is not really the right place for pleasant dinner with good wine.We had an aufull experience with wine bottle,Bottle was expensive,first problem was that waitress could not open the bottle,cause the cork was dry so left somewhere and came back after few minutes with open bottle.Ok...I tried wine and it was acid and bitter,impossible to drink thats why i wanted to order new bottle,but manager told us that bottle is ok and if everybody would say "its bad" about such expensive wine that is nonsens...We were shocked.The restaurant seemed like hight standart restaurant but it is only first wiew.Personal was aufull,be really carefull to order anything in this restaurant.

It has now closed for business, so it seems you weren't the only one who felt this way...;-)

Remaining tasks
This article is listed as being at Guide status, but if it really is a Guide, it's as yet a weak one, as many of the listings lack location information. It's essential to make every listing as complete as possible, in that it should have a clear street address, telephone number, URL and email address, where available, and opening hours and entrance fee where relevant. The article also needs a city map. Once those things are taken care of, it seems like this city is an ideal Off the Beaten Path candidate. Any other tasks that are required or advisable, in your opinion? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I can help with the listings sometime soon. I don't remember ever been to Olomouc, but at least I can understand the local language, so finding the informnation should be relatively easy for me :) Danapit (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Great! Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:25, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Very nice, especially as this would be our first featured article from the Czech Republic. I'm not sure if it's possible to feature it before the spring of 2016, though. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Possibly outdated listings
This company seems to have a very outdated web page (news regarding 2011), so I decided to archive it here.Danapit (talk) 14:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * And I added some more annual events, which I suspect might be discontnued. If that's not the case, please move them back in. Danapit (talk) 17:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Walking tours Perhaps the best thing you can do while in Olomouc is to join up with a walking tour. Olomouc Tours offers walking and cycling tours throughout the year and even a free! introductory tour in July and August. The tours visit little known places like the torture chamber beneath the Sarkander chapel and the old communist party headquarters out near the Morava River.

 * The Easter Music Festival involves performances of international musicians in the cathedral and largest churches of Olomouc.

 * The Marshall Radetzky Celebrations on the first weekend of September draw military bands from across Europe to honour the legendary Austrian general, onetime commander of the Olomouc Fortress and subject of Johann Strauss' immortal 'Radetzky March'.

 * Crossroads is a festival of Central European cultural exchange betweens artists, writers, musicians and translators from neighbouring countries. For the public there are readings, films and concerts.

This sentence regarding accommodation might also be outdated. I am not sure which railway station hostel is meant here, so I took it out until somebody can update on that. Another cheap option is the railway station hostel, along the tracks to the north of the main station. The old communist era building is run down, and neither the hostel nor the area around the train station can be recommended for females travelling alone.

 * Talking of outdated listings, Dana, in the case you haven't noticed, there's right now a discussion in the Pub about implementing a timestamp functionality for listings to see when they've last been edited. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Olomouc


text:
Talk:Oltenia

Regions
Oltenia is right now subregionalised in four county articles with a total of six linked cities. All of these 11 articles have very limited content. I suggest that we at least for now redirects from the four county articles. Any objections?, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 17:13, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

 * That sounds like a good idea. Six articles divided into four regions doesn't make a lot of (if any) sense. – (WT-en) Vidimian 17:20, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Oltenia


text:
Talk:Olympia (Washington)

Disambiguation
Even though the other Olympia is mostly an archaeological site, compared to a state capital of 40K+, almost all of the links to just Olympia were referring to the ruins, so I figured that this Olympia wasn't "much much more famous" enough to get a non-disambiguated name. Sorry. -(WT-en) Todd VerBeek 20:46, 20 July 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Olympia (Washington)


text:
Talk:Omagh

Holy christ! please do follow up on this, and complete the guide with listings etc., as there is obviously some unexplored talent behind this, and I'd love to see some apt descriptions of the local watering holes! --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 23:14, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

 * He, and er, maybe try to limiting your contributions to real tangible things, while we don't mind the colourful language one bit, we are also a travel guide :)

title: Talk:Omagh


text:
Talk:Omaha

Stay Safe???
who the hell wrote this part? it's wildly inacurate... Crime falls off the further west you go, it dosen't really depend on your lateral location unless your out of douglas county. Omaha, is a very segregated city, east of 48th street: south of dodge is mostly lower class hispanics and north of dodge is almost exclusively lower class blacks. west of 96th street you have practically no crime comparatively for omaha. and the further west you go the more money: the less crime there is. someone want to rewrite this? i think i got a bias?
 * Please feel free to plunge forward and make changes as you see fit! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:15, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Omaha


text:
Talk:Oman

Omani rials

 * I have moved this from my talk page to open the discussion up to other editors, and v to create a record of any decision we reach. Ground Zero (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I see you've been making lots of changes to Oman articles. The copy editing is much appreciated, but I do have some concerns with your currency notations.

I understand your wish to avoid the official ISO notation; however just as with writing out 'pesos' in Mexican articles, writing out rials for every price is, I think, far from ideal. In Oman prices are commonly listed in Arabic with 'ر.ع.', or in English with 'OR', and not written out with 'rials'. This can be especially problematic with some prices which may include fractions of a rial, and as the rial is an especially high-value currency, rounding up is not always a good idea.

Can we please come to an agreement on this before you proceed further with wholesale currency edits? –StellarD (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * D, I'm always happy to work out a consensus on something. I found the " OMR0.500 " notation to be very unclear because it uses "O" and "0" in one string. But " 0.500 rials " is grammatically correct, just as we'd say " 0.5 metres ". Yes, each of those can be converted to smaller units to avoid using b the final place, but it isn't required. "Rials" is consistent with what WV:$ says. If "OR" is commonly used, I'm okay with that, but can we leave a space between the symbol and the number for clarity, i.e., " OR 100 "? Or is it more common to see " 100 OR "? (Seeing both of those, I still think "rials" is the least confusing, but I won't stand in the way of common practice.) Ground Zero (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

 * I also find using OMR clunky, but I'd added it to Omani articles as that was my understanding of policy, as outlined at the top of the page. As in Mexico, where 'peso' is rarely spelled out, in Oman 'rial' is also rarely spelled out. (There's also the side issue of whether it should be spelled 'rial' or 'riyal' – I've seen both used in Oman.) To be clear, I've seen prices in Oman listed as '100 OMR', 'OMR 100', 'OMR100', 'RO100', '100RO', and also as 'OR 100' or '100 OR'. At the moment though I can't find any examples of these last two styles online, so it appears that OMR is now more common (I last visited Oman three years ago). I'd be okay with 'OR 100', which is clean and unambiguous, but now on reflection I'm leaning more toward 'OMR 100', as that seems to be possibly more common online.

 * While we're talking about Omani currency, perhaps we should also address other regional currencies as well, including the Saudi riyal (SR?), Qatari riyal (QR?), the Bahraini dinar (BD?), and the UAE dirham (AED?). –StellarD (talk) 17:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

 * , where the abbreviated form is not standard, we should pick one and stick with it to make it easier for the reader to follow. I saw mostly OMR in the articles, but also OR and RO. I would go with one of the shorter versions, rather than the ISO code. I think we should take up the other Gulf states on their respective talk pages. Ground Zero (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

 * After looking at a few more hotel websites, it now seems to me that OMR is definitely more common than other formats. –StellarD (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I would expect hotel's sites to use the ISO code because many people would be accessing the site from outside of the country. Unfortunately, cafes, restaurants, souks and shops tend not to have websites. The Central Bank of Oman uses " RO ## " (and spells it "rial"). So does the government's Oman News Agency. That wouldn't be a bad reason to choose that format. Ground Zero (talk) 19:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * 'RO 100' seems to me to be a good solution. It would be helpful if another editor could also voice his/her opinion, though, as I'm not sure this follows standard protocol. –StellarD (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * WV:$ does not answer every question for us when there are various notations used within a country. It starts off by saying, "Ideally, we want something that is easily readable by an English speaker, conveniently short, and easy for an editor to use; of course those goals sometimes conflict." So I think we have to use some judgement, and input from other editors would help use get there. Ground Zero (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oman


text:
Talk:Omkareshwar

VFD discussion
This is a single temple which I feel doesn't match our Project:What is an article policy.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 00:33, 19 December 2007 (EST)
 * Keep. It is an island town with a temple that is (apparently) an important pilgrimage site. There is at least one place to stay, perhaps more.--(WT-en) Wandering 09:48, 19 December 2007 (EST)
 * Quick check (LP India) reveals three additional places to stay on the island and a couple of other interesting sights too. Would love to go there!--(WT-en) Wandering 10:31, 19 December 2007 (EST)
 * Hmm, yes you are right. However... Is Omkareshwar the actual name of the village? What about the other big temple served by the facilities on this island? I considered a redirect to an article for the island itself, but I can't be sure what the name of that is either. (WT-en) Texugo 22:34, 21 December 2007 (EST)

 * Keep. It is definitely the name of the place – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 16:48, 29 December 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Omkareshwar


text:
Talk:Ondorkhaan

The Getty Thesaurus gives the name of this town as Öndörhaan. --(WT-en) Evan 14:56, 30 October 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Ondorkhaan


text:
Talk:One day in Baltimore

Merge
This article should be merged with Baltimore and its various district articles to avoid duplication. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:17, 8 March 2012 (EST)

title: Talk:One day in Baltimore


text:
Talk:One day in Bangkok

For the record, this itinerary was originally largely inspired by Stickman's Tour of Bangkok, although the careful reader will note that quite a few bits and pieces have changed. I've done this loop personally around 3 times and directed friends to it about as often, so it's about time I got it in written form! (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:02, 22 Sep 2004 (EDT)

 * I note that there's no mention of "Chess". --(WT-en) Evan 06:46, 9 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * Chess...? What am I missing? (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:35, 9 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * A very dumb joke. The 1986 rock musical Chess featured a song "One Night In Bangkok" that was a minor pop hit. --(WT-en) Evan 10:19, 5 Dec 2005 (EST)

I tried going to the resturant (Baan Khanitha) mentioned but after wondering aimlessly, I have a assume the place no longer exist ... I believe the resturant has moved... see: -- Noam 06 Dec, 2005

 * That's a surprise -- the Ruamrudee location is the original, the one in Sukhumvit is the newer one. But thanks for noting this and saving others from the trouble, I've also amended the Bangkok/Sukhumvit page. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:15, 5 Dec 2005 (EST)

The transliteration for pomelo salad shouldn't have an ending "m" - maybe "som-oh!" capture the right sound better for English speakers?

Grand Palace
I think it's a bit strange the Grand Palace is skipped on this one.. shouldn't it be on any one day Bangkok itinerary? --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:19, 25 January 2010 (EST)

Star?
I'm off to Bangkok later in the year and I'm wondering what I can do to help make this article a star? I'd be glad to help out. (PS I'm new to contributing so apologies if I'm going about this the wrong way) (WT-en) thatbelinda 10 Feb 2010
 * Welcome! This looks like a fairly thorough article -- revisions and improvements are always welcome, but comparing to other star itineraries, it could probably use a map to push it up to that status... not always easy to create.  Please also feel free to edit the main Bangkok article, it's also inching up towards a star.  - (WT-en) D. Guillaime 13:07, 10 February 2010 (EST)

Personal itinerary
We discourage them. How is this not exactly that? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

 * In practice, exceptions have been made for Guide-level articles of this type, though not for Usable articles, which I think is unfortunate, as we lost a pretty good itinerary article for Hong Kong as a result. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:One day in Bangkok


text:
Talk:One day in Newport

I think this article is an itinerary for Newport (Rhode Island) ? If so it should be copied into the Do section of that article and then deleted. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:37, 25 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Yeah, the title is horribly vague, it's written in first person, and it doesn't really constitute an "itinerary" for me, as it's really not organized in any cohesive geographical sequence, and there are strange gaps (i.e. eat lunch, visit the vineyard across the street-- for 5-6 hours??-- and then straight to dinner?). I think it's more a long way of saying "If you have only one day here, see the mansions in the morningtime so you can do something else the rest of the day." I'd say it should be disassembled and merged-- add the vineyard listing and restaurant listings that aren't in the article already, add any extra relevent info about the mansions, and toss the rest. (WT-en) texugo 23:37, 25 June 2011 (EDT)
 * Why hasn't this article been deleted yet? Was there no consensus in VfD? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 16:42, 9 October 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:One day in Newport


text:
Talk:One day in Taipei

criteria for a separate article?
Why was this tagged? This is meant to be an itinerary.--(WT-en) Jiang 17:54, 9 April 2012 (EDT)

 * After a lengthy discussion the criteria for itinerary articles have been updated - see Project:Itineraries for the policy, and Project:Itineraries for the discussion. Project:Itineraries explains the reasoning for the change. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:00, 9 April 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:One day in Taipei


text:
Talk:One day in Tokyo

I am not the author of this page, just a casual visitor. However, I couldn't help but have a look at the link in the copyright violation notice. if you look at the bottom of that page, you'll see this note:

(Article based on Wikivoyage article by Based on work by Anonymous user(s) of Wikivoyage. Article used under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0.)

I'm guessing that's the explanation of why the two pages are identical ;-)

 * Good eye! :) I've removed the "copyvio" notice. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 17:11, 1 July 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:One day in Tokyo


text:
Talk:One month in Southeast Asia

I'm planning on doing this trip next January, can someone please expand this article? That would be massive!!! :) thanks —The preceding comment was added by 24.5.13.165 (talk • contribs)

 * Massive, wow, I haven't heard that since 2000. I agree with your sentiments, though. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 23:29, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

 * It's on my to-do list - a couple of variations, at least... (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:40, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Recreate deleted page
This article was deleted after discussion at Votes_for_deletion/April_2014. However, it was showing up near the top of Special:WantedPages because there are 14 links to it. None are from main space, but still ...

I have recreated it as a redirect to Southeast Asia. Pashley (talk) 06:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:One month in Southeast Asia


text:
Talk:One month in the Holy Land

References and sources

 * Wikipedia's list of holy cities
 * Wikipedia article - Holy Land

Thoughts
Anyone have any thoughts on how I should attack this? Should I make this a Christian and Jewish holy land article and spin off an Islamic one? The benefit of that is a lot of Christian and Jewish holy lands overlap, while the Islamic holy land is primarily based in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore some Muslim holy cities like Mecca are strictly off limits to non-Muslims and disobedience of this law is punishable by deportation or possibly death.

Thanks for any input. (WT-en) Sapphire 00:52, 22 April 2006 (EDT)

 * What about a separate guide for the landmarks of each faith? A Jewish traveler (or someone else interested in that tradition) could then follow the guide for sites holy to him, a Christian traveler (or someone else interested) could follow that guide and the Jewish guide, and a Muslim traveler (or someone else, as permitted) could follow that guide (and to the extent that he finds them meaningful, the other two).  Granted there is some geographic overlap, but I'd expect the focus to be on See and Do rather than Sleep and Eat and Get Around, so the fact that all three would probably include Jerusalem shouldn't lead to much duplication, because the travelers would be going to visit the (pick one) Western Wall/Mount of Olives/Dome of the Rock. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 19:44, 23 April 2006 (EDT)

 * I like that idea. Should we turn this into a disamb page? Additionally, I would also suggest incoporating sites and destinations that have a significant meaning to each religion rather than strictly the holy cities and sites. For example - Mount Arafat, the place where Muhammad gave his last sermon. It's a required destination for pilgrims on the Hajj, but it is my understanding that the area is not really holy. - (WT-en) Andrew a.k.a. Sapphire

title: Talk:One month in the Holy Land


text:
Talk:Pilgrimage to the Jewish Holy Land

What's the exact purpose of this page? It's a bit vague, I'm not sure whether it won't be deleted (not that I would be the one requesting its deletion of course, I am just wondering what purpose it has). --(WT-en) Daniel575 30 May 2006
 * This article is an itinerary. Jewish travellers traveling to/through out the Holy Land may be interested in a periodic trip, and we hope that we can provide a useful guide to arranging and planning the itinerary. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 20:26, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * The way the article started and what you just changed it back to is complete nonsense, unreadable and totally unusable. Change it to whatever you want, but there is no reason to include Arabic and Latin names for the Holy Land in this article, and the grammar is that of a 2nd grade child. --(WT-en) Daniel575 30 May 2006
 * I have reverted your changes for the following reason: There are Arab Jews that speak Arabic and may find the Arabic text helpful. Secondly, if you do not find the grammar satisfactory rewrite the article to better suit the needs of editors and travellers alike. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 05:05, 31 May 2006 (EDT)
 * It was simply unreadable. There are Arab Jews, yes. However, they no longer speak Arabic - they either speak English (or French) or Hebrew. None of them very much appreciate seeing the name of Eretz Yisrael in Arabic. Nor is the Latin name relevant here. Those are relevant for the article Holy Land or for articles on Wikipedia. This is Wikivoyage and articles here are meant for travellers, and this article specifically for Jewish travellers. Since it's written in English, aside from English only the Hebrew name is relevant. Arab Jews pray in Hebrew, speak Hebrew nowadays, and the naming of Eretz Yisrael (=The Land of Israel) in Arabic has a distinct religious flavor to it which does not belong in an articled directed towards Jews coming there. Nor does the Latin term have any relevance, same story. --(WT-en) Daniel575 00:25, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
 * This isn't an article solely for Jewish travelers. Many Christians and Muslims also consider "the Jewish Holy Land" (including specifically Jewish sites) to be part of their holy land, and have an interest in visiting these sites.  Because the article is for English-speaking people, English is the usual terminology we should use.  But for reasons of courtesy/education, we routinely put the names that the locals use in the introductory paragraphs (e.g. Finland identifies it as "Suomi") and since Arabic is one of the languages commonly used in some of these territories, it's appropriate to include it here. You're right that the Latin was a bit pointless in this context; chalk that up to an attempt to be ecumenical and inclusive.  I realize that's anathema to some people, but I don't see it as something to get your panties in a bunch over. Again. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 00:38, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Where to stay
I've reverted the section because individual listings go in the specific guide for that city. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 23:35, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
 * This article is specifically focused on Jewish travelers. Heritage House is specifically focused on accomodating young Jewish people who are visiting Israel. It is the link that needs to be placed here. --(WT-en) Daniel575 23:56, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
 * You're missing the point. There is a hierarchy for information that is standard to Wikivoyage.  It has nothing to do with who the article is "for;" it's for ease in navigation.  Please comply with this hierarchy. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 23:58, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Pilgrimage to the Jewish Holy Land


text:
Talk:One week in Santo Domingo for a student

Necessary?
What is there about this article that makes it "for a student"? Why not just "One week in Santo Domingo"? And anyway, this article is not presenting an itinerary; it merely duplicates information from the main Santo Domingo article. (WT-en) Texugo 19:12, 8 March 2010 (EST)
 * Anyone?(WT-en) Texugo 03:32, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

VFD Discussion
This supposed itinerary is neither an itinerary nor does it have anything specifically for students. It merely duplicates some listings from the main Santo Domingo article and even has some things that aren't in the main article but should be. I posted a note to that effect on the talk page a few weeks ago but no one replied, so I'm putting it here.
 * Merge and delete - (WT-en) Texugo 11:08, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
 * Merge and delete for the same reasons given above. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:10, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
 * "Merge and delete" shouldn't be an option; Merge and redirect is the only proper method. (WT-en) LtPowers 10:25, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Why on earth redirect that article title?--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:50, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
 * The article history must be maintained for attribution purposes; otherwise it's a copyright violation to simply copy someone else's text into a different article. (WT-en) LtPowers 19:45, 1 April 2010 (EDT)
 * There is some sense in that, but if I created an article with a couple of salvageable listings and called it 46 and half hours in February in Santo Domingo when you don't have a girlfriend and you only have 60 dollars, I would hope that it gets merged and deleted; a simple attribution note on the talk page would be sufficient. In either case, you can't get around putting an attribution note on the talk page, which sounds like yet another argument for a talk page attribution section. (WT-en) Texugo 22:18, 1 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Merge and Delete.   I don't agree with (WT-en) LtPowers that we need to keep the redirect for attribution in this case.  There are only a couple of contributors to the text, and it makes more sense to just reference them in merge edit, then it does to keep a redirect.  The attribution quality is better - but possibly still not sufficient. It is an argument for some sort of policy on how we attribute - but not an argument for putting it on the talk page (which is for meta-discussion, not for attribution). --(WT-en) inas 23:12, 7 April 2010 (EDT)

Result: Template:Merge added to the article -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:19, 25 May 2010 (EDT)