text:
Talk:Gaeta

The article text has been taken directly from World66. Are CC-SA 1.0 and 2.0 compatible? And what's our stance on World66's legally dubious method of licensing said content in the first place? (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:44, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * Our stance is pretty poor on it. I'll blank this article and start with a stub. --(WT-en) Evan 09:47, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)

What I wrote prior to a collision with Evan

 * It's also on the site belonging to a hotel in Gaeta. I suspect that that's actually the source. Perhaps our anon user is a representative of the hotel, in which case I would be satisfied that it's their text to post so long as they identify themselves as such.

 * Meanwhile we do need to rename the article and to bring it into MOS. -- (WT-en) Mark 09:49, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Gaeta


text:
Talk:Gainesville (Florida)

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

Comments
Removed clear advertising of product

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

title: Talk:Gainesville (Florida)


text:
Talk:Gaithersburg

Revert
For whomever is interested, I just rolled back a bunch of content deletion and copyvios from Wikipedia & the City of Gaithersburg website. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:36, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Gaithersburg


text:
Talk:Galapagar

Is Galapagar a town or village?

If you read the 'Getting around' section in the main article, you'll see what I mean. Add your contribution to the debate here.

 * And is it a district of Madrid, or just a nearby town/village? It's listed under "districts" on the Madrid page, and if it indeed is then this page should be moved to Madrid/Galapagar, if not then it should be moved to the "Get out" section on the Madrid page... (WT-en) Cacahuate 02:05, 19 January 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Galapagar


text:
Talk:Galapagos Islands

Galapagos
Copied from User:Wrh2 Talk page - Galapagos

Hi Ryan,

I see that you've been to the Galapagos Islands quite a lot. I spent (only) a week there a couple of years ago. It would be good to have some really good articles, but I don't fancy doing it all on my own. Do you have some time next week to possibly help me start putting something more together? -- (WT-en) DanielC 17:11, 9 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Hi Daniel,

 * I've been meaning to add more info on the Galapagos Islands, Antarctica, and Alaska, but keep getting sidetracked with national parks... that said, if you feel like starting some Galapagos articles I'd be happy to dive in and help make updates. Any thought as to how you're going to do it?  I would assume that an article for each island would make sense, although most of the standard headings (Sleep, Eat, Drink, Buy, Get In, Get Out, Get Around) don't really apply since the only way of seeing places is on a boat tour. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 17:37, 9 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Yep. I'd though of starting with a Galapagos Wildlife page, with sub-pages for birds, underwater (etc?), then articles for each of the uninhabited islands pointing out the permitted landing places and dive/snorkel spots, with the usual info for the inhabited (two?) islands. Any thoughts? -- (WT-en) DanielC 13:05, 10 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * The Galapagos Wildlife page sounds like a good idea (sort of like African flora and fauna). Puerto Ayora probably needs its own article, but the lodging on Isabela Island, San Cristobal Island and Floreana Island can probably be worked into the island pages.  I may have some time this weekend to get things started, otherwise go for it and I'll help out as I can.  -- (WT-en) Wrh2 15:22, 11 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I've had a start. I think that it's more natural to call the island eg. Floreana, rather than Floreana Island - that's what I've done so far. What do you think?

 * I've had a start on a standrard layout format on the article for Espanola. Any comments? -- (WT-en) DanielC 11:44, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * The Galapagos Wildlife page is awesome -- I'll try and add to it as time permits, although I've suddenly gotten a bit busy. Dropping the "Island" from the article names seems fine, too.  I took a stab at making some updates to the Galapagos article, but feel free to revert any of my changes; mostly I was just trying to use the standard template format where it made sense.

 * And the format you're using for Espanola seems logical to me. Any preference on whether changing the headings to "Visitor sites" and "Underwater sites" might be simpler?  Beyond that, I like the idea of making each island page be a description of the island (Understand) with a listing of land sites (Visitor sites) and snorkeling/diving sites (Underwater sites); there doesn't seem to be much else to add unless there is somewhere to sleep or a permanent research site, in which case a Sleep or Work section might be called for. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 03:23, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I'm aware of the comment of Wrh2, but a I made separate page about Puerto Villamil and Isabela anyway. I'll do the same for San Cristobal. We'll see how it grows and can always merge it again. --- Ronald 19 dec 2005 (this spanish keyboard doesn't have a tilde)

 * What you've done looks fine to me. The original comment was made in the context of what (WT-en) DanielC and I could do, and I've spent less than a day in Puerto Villamil so couldn't write much about it.  I don't think we want articles on individual visitor sites, but the present approach of creating articles for each island as well as any towns on the islands seems fine. -- (WT-en) Ryan 15:06, 20 Dec 2005 (EST)

Hello - I actually don't know how to edit these things, but I just wanted to note that it appears to me that there has been some vandalism on this post. I do not think that the first rule of the Galapagos Islands is that everyone has to be naked. Otherwise, I might rethink my impending trip. I'd rather not see that many pasty naked middle-aged people at one time. . . —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 132.205.75.109 (talk • contribs)

 * You're seeing an older, cached version of the page - that edit was removed. We occasionally have software problems that cause older versions of the page to display, but the issues usually resolve themselves over time. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:00, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

Tower --> Genovesa
Originally I had listed Tower/Genovesa island as Tower since when I visited a few years ago it was the only island that was referred to by its English name. However, both of my friends that lead trips in the islands are now referring to it by its Spanish name, so I've updated the Galapagos Islands page to use Genovesa instead. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 14:21, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Get out
Do you think that it's worth adding a getting out section to the island articles, just telling you which are the nearest islands (not that you get a choice about whether you go there)? -- (WT-en) DanielC 15:56, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Sounds like a good idea for islands that are close enough to be seen in one day -- such as mentioning Rabida on the Santiago page, or North Seymour on the Bartolome page. For more remote islands like Genovesa or Espanola, it seems like Get out would primarily serve the purpose of describing where the island is located in relation to other islands, which is information that seems more suited to Understand.  Thinking about it more though, I guess having to navigate back to the Galapagos Islands main article from each island article could be a bit awkward for someone wanting to read up on each island... I don't know.  My first inclination is that it's a good idea for islands close enough to be seen in one day, and not as good of an idea for more remote islands.  But I don't feel strongly enough that I'd disagree with either implementation. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 16:28, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Spelling of Galapagos
Isn't the correct spelling Galápagos Islands (with an accent on the second A) ? It seems to me that the page should be moved, shouldn't it? --(WT-en) Zvika 04:01, 6 October 2007 (EDT)

Any Requests?
I am going to Galapagos diving in 2 weeks. I will be on the Deep Blue for 7 days including Darwin and Wolf, with some land trips too. I will be taking lots of pictures, mostly underwater, and will put them on the Commons. Any specific requests for info I can gather or pictures to take for this page? (WT-en) Jetlife2 19:12, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

 * Happy to hear you'll be visiting Darwin & Wolf (since we don't have articles for them yet). Looking forward to see the pictures too. As far as info goes, some background info for the "understand" sections of the city articles would be great. Also, I'd really like to see an extensive flora/fauna section of "see," with info about individual species and how/where best to pay them a visit. For pictures, it would be great to try and illustrate individual articles with at least one image (could be a tough task though). It would be really cool if we could get the articles here up to snuff enough to nominate the collection of articles for Destination of the Month. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:04, 16 August 2008 (EDT)

 * Since landings on Darwin and Wolf are all-but-impossible I'm not sure it would be possible to write articles about those islands, but getting more information about scuba in general, and Darwin and Wolf in particular, would be great - we could probably end up with a specific "Scuba diving in the Galapagos" article at some point. Things to note in such an article would be popular dive sites, costs, preparation, etc.  In addition, if you can note prices during your trip it would help keep the article up-to-date as it seems like costs in the islands go up 10-15% every year.  As to pictures, a few shots that illustrate what makes the Galapagos unique would be good - people walking through a boobie colony (but read Image policy), swimming with sea lions, etc.  Enjoy your trip! -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 02:59, 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Tour Listings
I've pruned a number of booking agencies from the list of Galapagos tour companies per the tour listing policy. For future editors trying to patrol this article, any company that offers passage on either the Galapagos Legend or M/V Explorer is a booking agent - these are 100 passenger boats on which passage is sold throughout Ecuador, and while it is theoretically possible to charter the entire ship, the companies that were listed in this article weren't doing that. Similarly, any company that lists tours on more than 4-6 boats is almost certainly a booking agent; most tour companies seem to pick one or two boat operators to work with. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:54, 31 January 2010 (EST)

 * Ryan- I don't understand your edits it is possible to charter the entire Galapagos Explorer and is done on a regular basis by groups like colleges, fraternal organizations and other groups.  You are removing different companies and your reasoning seems to be one of personal choice rather than based on following a pattern.

 * And if you charter the entire Galapagos Explorer you do it through http://www.galapagosexplorer.com/, which is listed in the article. Anyone else is re-selling berths on that ship and thus should not be listed here per the Tour policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:34, 28 April 2010 (EDT)

Ryan stop deleting Galapagos Online they are an operator as well as representative. If you want to delete the companies that DO NOT OPERATE IN GALAPAGOS THEN DELETE: adventure life, Cheeseman, Galapagos Travel, Sun Wind, Galapagos Legend which is not the boat but a link to a travel agency in San Diego. Explain why you are keeping some agencies who are ONLY resalers and deleting companies which have operations? Movera

 * Please read Project:Edit war. In general it is easy to work out any disagreements on an article talk page, but continually re-adding listings when it has been pointed out that they seem to violate site policy is not the way to do so.  I looked at your company web site and didn't see anything to indicate that you offer anything beyond what a traveler would get by booking directly with the boat operator and thus removed the listing with a pointer to the Tour policy.  If you disagree then state why your company isn't just a re-seller, but note that edit warring is a very, very poor way to convince anyone to listen to you. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:53, 28 April 2010 (EDT)

The Tour listing policy is meant to help control spammy listings on Wikivoyage - literally dozens, if not hundreds of travel agencies try to list their tours on the Galapagos page, so the tour policy is the guideline that helps manage those listings. The relevant parts of that policy for the Galapagos are:

 * 1) The company must not be a re-seller.  It is OK if they completely charter the boat, sell all berths, and operate the tour, but if they are simply selling berths on someone else's tour then the company should not be listed.
 * 2) If the company does not own the boat it is OK, as long as they run the tour.
 * 3) The company does not need to be located in Ecuador, as long as they do have an actual office and someone from their company is running the tour.

Based on these criteria, Cheesemans, CNH, Galapagos Travel and others are OK to be listed - they charter the boats and send someone to the islands to act as a guide on the tour. If the link for the Galapagos Legend is wrong, please fix it, but that seems to be the company that operates the boat. Hopefully that explains the edits that have been made. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:57, 28 April 2010 (EDT)

External Link Policy - Galapagos
Moved from User talk:(WT-en) Wrh2:

I am going to try to be as diplomatic as possible on this argument. You have no additional "power" over the content of Wikivoyage as anyone else does, and by erasing my listing ALSO WITHOUT ANY NOTICE OR ATTEMPT TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION also constitutes Edit warring which you so passionately frown upon. Before erasing a link, contact the person and get some INFORMATION ON YOUR DATA before going ahead and erasing a link. Travel Galapagos Islands is owned by a company in Ecuador who DOES OPERATE their own tours in Galapagos like Island Hopping, and DOES CHARTER cruises for its own operation. So here is a big FYY on your quality "purging" of Tour listings.

Nina and Athala Catamarans, [16]. Points to www.galapagosislands.com WHICH IS A BOOKING AGENT AND NOT THE OWNER OF NINA OR ATHALA.

Lets see...

Galapagos Travel (US), [18]. Offers a catalogue for more than 10 ships in the GAlapagos. NOT A RESELLER?

SunWind Travel, [21]. Offers a catalogue of more than 10 ships in the GALAPAGOS. NOT A RESELLER??

So you see Ryan, I am willing to take this to the travellers forums, I have made a download of the website to prove that your "purging" is totally mis-informed. So, please, in order not to engage in such time-consuming problem, I will upload the link again as soon as I get your reply. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Rafaec (talk • contribs)

 * If your company is the sole company chartering these trips and you are putting staff (NOT just the national park guide) on board then it is OK to list, but looking at there are six boats listed and no indication that anyone from your company is on board.  If some of the existing tours should similarly be removed please discuss on this page - in the past Galapagos Travel chartered the boat and put their own staff on board, but if that is no longer the case then removing them probably makes sense. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:44, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

Image gallery?
That's not normally part of the article templates. --EvanProdromou (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Should all islands have their own article?
It appears that every island in the Galapagos is listed as a sub article. Most are quite small and do not appear to have permanent populations, let alone pass the 'sleep test'.

See Genovesa and Pinzon as examples.

Should we merge all the uninhabited islands into one article? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Ping? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Pinzon is a 1-sentence stub, so obviously not a real article. Genovesa looks like a viable article to me. I would suggest Pinta, another stub, as the most logical other candidate for merge/redirect. That said, if you like, create your proposed article in your userspace and link it here for comment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:34, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

 * If the article is short and there probably isn't very much to say about a particular island anyway, just merge it. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

 * I think the uninhabited islands are too different and dispersed to combine into a single article - as User:Ikan Kekek says, go ahead and create one as an example if you'd like, but I think it could easily become huge and unwieldy. It would probably be better to just write a few sentences of text about the islands that are closed to visitors in the main Galapagos Islands article, as User:Traveler100 did with Pinzon, and leave the islands that people can visit as they are. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Proposing to merge the 3 towns on 3 of the islands into their respective island articles. As there is little chance of many more settlements having their own page I think best to have all listing for an island on that island page. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:15, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Galapagos Islands


text:
Talk:Galapagos wildlife

I've tried to break the wildlife / flora into Land, Air, Sea, otherwise I think it's confusing to have land and sea mammals in the same section, but then I'm a bit inconsistent with the iguanas & turtles... -- (WT-en) DanielC 10:20, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I think that this article should be merged with Galapagos Islands. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:44, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I think that all this info would overpower the main article. It is similar to African flora and fauna. It is also a work-in-progress (see User talk:(WT-en) Wrh2). -- (WT-en) DanielC 07:40, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Thanks for pointing that out. I was not aware of your thinking You should have copied or moved that conversation here too. That way we can all benefit from the developmental ideas that lead to the creation of this article and why it should not be part of the main article. I will add it now (See Below). -- 210.55.146.33 08:49, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * The discussion started on my talk page prior to the new Galapagos pages being created, and it's my fault for continuing the discussion once the pages had been created. Sorry about that.  But I agree with (WT-en) Daniel that having a separate page for Galapagos wildlife is probably the best option, otherwise the Galapagos Islands article and each of the individual island articles would contain a lot of duplication and probably become swamped with animal information.  In addition, most travel guides to the Galapagos include several pages devoted solely to the flora & fauna. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 14:17, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Ryan: I wouldn't be too apologetic. Although Huttie does loads and loads of good work, in this case I think he was a bit hasty. He probably saw the last edit from an anonymous user (a logged out me) and thought it was an inexperienced user's creation. I was actually planning to write about the strucutre of the articles (including a set of sections for the islands) on the Talk Pages anyway when we had finished working it out. I will do this in a while. -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:23, 14 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Galapagos
Copied from User:Wrh2 Talk page - Galapagos Hi Ryan,

I see that you've been to the Galapagos Islands quite a lot. I spent (only) a week there a couple of years ago. It would be good to have some really good articles, but I don't fancy doing it all on my own. Do you have some time next week to possibly help me start putting something more together? -- (WT-en) DanielC 17:11, 9 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Hi Daniel,

 * I've been meaning to add more info on the Galapagos Islands, Antarctica, and Alaska, but keep getting sidetracked with national parks... that said, if you feel like starting some Galapagos articles I'd be happy to dive in and help make updates. Any thought as to how you're going to do it?  I would assume that an article for each island would make sense, although most of the standard headings (Sleep, Eat, Drink, Buy, Get In, Get Out, Get Around) don't really apply since the only way of seeing places is on a boat tour. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 17:37, 9 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Yep. I'd though of starting with a Galapagos Wildlife page, with sub-pages for birds, underwater (etc?), then articles for each of the uninhabited islands pointing out the permitted landing places and dive/snorkel spots, with the usual info for the inhabited (two?) islands. Any thoughts? -- (WT-en) DanielC 13:05, 10 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * The Galapagos Wildlife page sounds like a good idea (sort of like African flora and fauna). Puerto Ayora probably needs its own article, but the lodging on Isabela Island, San Cristobal Island and Floreana Island can probably be worked into the island pages.  I may have some time this weekend to get things started, otherwise go for it and I'll help out as I can.  -- (WT-en) Wrh2 15:22, 11 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I've had a start. I think that it's more natural to call the island eg. Floreana, rather than Floreana Island - that's what I've done so far. What do you think?

 * I've had a start on a standrard layout format on the article for Espanola. Any comments? -- (WT-en) DanielC 11:44, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * The Galapagos Wildlife page is awesome -- I'll try and add to it as time permits, although I've suddenly gotten a bit busy. Dropping the "Island" from the article names seems fine, too.  I took a stab at making some updates to the Galapagos article, but feel free to revert any of my changes; mostly I was just trying to use the standard template format where it made sense.

 * And the format you're using for Espanola seems logical to me. Any preference on whether changing the headings to "Visitor sites" and "Underwater sites" might be simpler?  Beyond that, I like the idea of making each island page be a description of the island (Understand) with a listing of land sites (Visitor sites) and snorkeling/diving sites (Underwater sites); there doesn't seem to be much else to add unless there is somewhere to sleep or a permanent research site, in which case a Sleep or Work section might be called for. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 03:23, 13 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * As noted on Ryan's talk page, I hit an ambiguity problem on Espanola owing to a similarly named town (plus tilde) in New Mexico, United States that I'm working on. Have tried to disambiguate (by going to Espanola (Galapagos)) there and here, but a photo seems to have been lost in the shuffle.  Sorry; can one of you guys look into it? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:13, 29 Sep 2005 (EDT)

What to bring
Is there any reason for the what to bring section under Galapagos Wildlife that seems like it should be in Galapagos Islands rather than a travel page discussing the wildlife you would see.(WT-en) Movera 17:39, 30 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Moving that information to the Galapagos Island article makes sense - this page was originally started as an experiment, so some of the sections may be unnecessary or non-standard. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:44, 30 April 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Galapagos wildlife


text:
Talk:Galena

https://www.galenahistory.org/research/galena-history/galena-facts/ has some info on the origins of the name; it looks to be lead ore or shale extraction.

title: Talk:Galena


text: Talk:Galena (Illinois)

title: Talk:Galena (Illinois)


text:
Talk:Galicia

Galician language
Galician is not a kind of portuguese, both two are different languages who evolved from the same, ancient galician or galaico-portugués.

>Only the Galician Royal Academy (RAG) supports that radical separation between Galician and Portuguese (see above), and even the RAG recognizes that there is a "great similarity" between the two as they are "related languages". As a general rule, linguists support that Galician and Portuguese are co-dialects of the same common language or, in other words, varities of a common language, diverse but essentially the same (in terms of grammar, syntax, codes, vocabulary, etc). A third variety of this common language would be Brazilian-Portuguese. However, it is true that the perception in Galicia may be that Portuguese and Galician are different languages (to some), although from a non-Galician person studying the language the differences will mainly come down to different accents, coloquialism and the current Galician spelling system, which is a copy of the Spanish spelling system. Sadly, this whole issue is deeply enrooted in politics (as with the choice of spelling systems for spoken Galician), and objective views are sometimes difficult to find. Opinions in Galicia are very diverse, so it is not a topic to be approached for a visitor unless he/she knows what he/she is talking about (i.e. do not take it lightly).

Galicia is the common English name for the place, so I've moved the article to that name. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:11, 24 May 2005 (EDT)

Cleanup ODs
I cleaned up this stuff from the list of ODs. I'm pretty sure we can use it again in the future, but this doesn't improve navigation for now. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:32, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

Other destinations
These lands are blessed with natural landscapes that offer ample diversity and quality destinations throughout the zone. Natural and industrial resources together with rich livestock and gastronomy where fish and seafood are in abundance. Sea, salt and sand fill this coastal zone, brimming with cliffs, coves, and beaches to enjoy oneself in the summer months. Monuments, stately homes, churches, popular and religious architecture and a multitude of fiestas to interest the tourist round off the possibilities that this destination has to offer, and make it the best way to get close to nature and history.
 * A Coruña - Terra das Mariñas

This varied coastline, full of estuaries and areas of spectacular cliffs and sandy coves is connected to the coastal mountains through valleys that merit some importance. They have allowed agricultural and proto-industrial activity, as well as being a home to natural and scenic richness.The coastal mountains although not very high are full of treasures, formations, valleys of glacial origin and extensive peat lands.
 * A Mariña Lucense

The A Raia region is a frontier zone where the Parque Natural Galego "Baixa Limia Serra do Xurés" and the neighbouring Portuguese national park "Peneda-Geres" form a cross-border park that is unique in Europe. Roman legions passed here in the conquest of the Callaici tribe. In those times no frontier was present and it would be a long time before there was one. By altitude, this area preserves the lowest glacial circus' of the Iberian Peninsula.
 * A Raia - Baixa Limia

In the Allariz district you can enjoy different cultural and leisure activities. Walking and recreational areas; sporting and equestrian activities; canoeing; sporting disciplines such as triathlon or hiking; fiestas and country fayres of taditional produce; cultural activities present all year round. Allariz is probably one of the most beautifully restored old towns in Galicia.
 * Allariz

El Caurel is Galicia's huge nature reserve. Nearly all species, except coastal ones, are represented here. This area is on the geographic and climatic border inbetween the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. These mountains, due to its inaccessibility have allowed the survival of native forests called meadows, referring to oak, beech, yew, birch and holly trees, and generally present at river sources. The most famous one is the Dehesa de A Rogueira, both for distribution and amount of species and water features. The words of the poet Uxío Novoneyra will tell more than any explanation: "Courel, your peaks cry out from afar! Here you can hear very well, how small a man is...".
 * Ancares - O Caurel

A history that has its roots in the neolithic, with traces of tempestuous periods and seafaring tragedies. Where legend mixes with reality, nature has a soul and the stones are authentic sanctuaries. A world of light and shade, stormy and calm. A coastline of incomparable beauty, abrupt cliffs and extensive beaches with the best sunsets in the world. A paradise for the lovers of marine ecosystems, sports and secluded beaches. A treat for the senses, the scenery, sound, touch, not to mention taste. The best raw ingredients for the best cuisine. The land of the senses: costa da Morte, the end of the road. It all starts where it all ends...
 * Costa da Morte

To the north of A Coruna province, the districts of Ferrol and Ortegal form part of an area of exceptional interest. Here the visitor can enjoy magnificent beaches, discover the largest cliffs in Europe and visit a city of undoubtable appeal such as Ferrol. The third district of this destination is the Eume district: an enchantment of coastal towns, the denseness of the National Park "Fragas do Eume" and the tranquil beaches which make an ideal spot for the tired traveller. Centuries of history have left this land with castles, bridges and monasteries.
 * Ferrol-Eume-Ortegal

The so called Rias Baixas follow a trail from Baiona to Fisterra. The Rías Baixas are the Estuaries of Vigo, Pontevedra, Arousa and Muros-Noia. The existing coastline can be broken down into tree covered areas intertwined amongst farmland. Orchards, crops and vineyards surround the villages, towns and cities. This generates a varied and joyful landscape. As well as having a rich and varied environment, one must add the extensive range of fish, seafood, wines and agricultural produce which will entice any gastronome. Art lovers can also find many distractions: Castros, roman, gothic or barroque churches. If time permits you may also visit stately country homes and magnificent museums like those found in Pontevedra, Vigo or Bueu.
 * Rías Baixas

Discover the Ribeira Sacra – Galicia´s Sacred Riverside where nature and history go hand in hand. In this corner of northwest Spain steep riversides, full of solitude, attracted monks and hermits from earliest times. Over the centuries it boasted one of the highest concentrations of monasteries throughout Europe. Today we can contemplate the lives of those ancient inhabitants of the Ribeira Sacra in the monuments they left behind them – from the simple and primitive to the truly majestic. In the steeply terraced vineyards and ancient chestnut groves it is possible to catch a glimpse of an ancient lifestyle that was also their legacy. And, as ever, the scenery of the Ribeira Sacra continues to captivate travellers today, with a thousand views and un-discovered corners, seemingly untouched by the passing of time.
 * Ribeira Sacra

The Terras Altas de Galicia (highlands) include all the settlements surrounding the Manzaneda Mountains in the province of Ourense. Amongst these mountain chains you can find the highest peak of Galicia, the Peña Trevinca peak (2127 metres), also called the ceiling of Galicia. The district comprises the municipalities of San Xoan de Río, A Pobra de Trives, Chandrexa de Queixa, Manzaneda, Larouco, A Rúa, Petín, Vilamartin, de Valdeorras, O Barcode Valdeorras, Rubiá, Carballeda de Valdeorras, O Bolo, A Veiga, Viana do Bolo, Vilarino de Conso, A Gudina and A Mezquita. Some of the municipalities border Castilla and Leon, Galicia's neighbouring province to the South-East.
 * Terras Altas de Galicia

The land of natural and cultural heritage. The Roman Walls of Lugo: this monument symbolises Lugo. It is considered to be the best preserved and most important fortified settlement from the Roman world and has been declared World Heritage by the UNESCO. But there is more to see and experience in and around Lugo like the many protected natural spaces: the Biosphere Reserve Terras do Miño and the Sites of Community Importance Parga-Ladra-Támoga and Serra do Xistral.
 * Terras de Lugo

Heritage, culture, landscapes, gastronomy, people, ancient stones, water and silence that envelop and captivate the visitor. A magical territory full of colour, energy and different tones, a gift for the senses where time takes on another meaning, a place where thinking, feeling and living has another dimension. A whole world to discover.
 * Terras de Ourense

Santiago, the heart of Galicia and centre of pilgrimage since medieval times. Here the most diverse cultures melt with Galician tradition. Undulating soft hills and numerous rivers form part of the terrain, abundant in dense green vegetation that characterises the landscape. Cobbled streets, squares, manor houses and churches that transport us to another time live side by side with secular forests and river landscapes.
 * Terras de Santiago
 * Muros
 * O Caurel
 * O Salnés
 * Rias Baixas
 * Sil

title: Talk:Galicia


text:
Talk:Galmudug

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

vfd discussion
This article was nominated for deletion at one stage but consensus was to keep.

Galmudug
Graffiti, delete --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 18:02, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

 * Actually, this looks to me like a well intentioned contribution. And since Galmudug is a region of Somalia (with its own government and some degree of sovereignty no less), I say keep and add a region template, but remove most of the current information, as it is not travel relevant. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:12, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Keep. It is an actual region that is seeking to gain semi-independent status within a united Somalia. See WP article for reference: . (WT-en) WindHorse 20:49, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
 * added template, de-orphaned. Keep. --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 05:44, 3 August 2007 (EDT)
 * Outcome: Kept -- (WT-en) NJR_ZA 14:11, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Galmudug


text:
Talk:Galveston

I don't really know what's considered appropriate at wikivoyage, as I've just made my way over here from wikipedia, but I do want to throw out there that La Estacion is the best Mexican food you'll ever have. This is coming from a Texas native here. -- Laurascudder | Talk 207.224.34.237 01:28, 19 Apr 2005 (EDT)

That would be totally appropriate
Sounds totally appropriate. I'm going to go ahead and put that into the form from the Project:Manual of style for Project:Restaurant listings, but if you could add the contact hours and price info that would rock! -- (WT-en) Mark 04:19, 19 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Metered Parking
I think it should be noted that the downtown area around the strand has installed meters that now take cash, coins, and credit cards. Also there is plenty of free parking along the coast in Galveston.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 1900 Storm Memorial 2.jpg

 * FoP issue. If we think it's important to have this image on the page, we need to upload it locally. What do we think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It would really be a pity to lose a VI... SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll take care of this later, then, if no-one beats me to it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Uploaded locally. I don't understand the funky formatting problems, so fix the documentation if you can. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:12, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Galveston


text:
Talk:Galveston, Texas

Please do not add an article to this page. Please add it to Galveston] instead. Please read [[Project:Article naming conventions. -- (WT-en) Huttite 04:09, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

Broken Page
I note that the article is broken and cannot be edited. Reported as bug. -- (WT-en) Huttite 04:43, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Galveston, Texas


text:
Talk:Galway

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

request for help
Swept in from the travellers pub

Yesterday I put up an ad for Eds New York Pizza In th "eat" section of Galway City, Ireland. Today I went back to see if anyone had responded and The whole entire Eat section is gone. Please help.(WT-en) Rcevoli 10:30, 1 February 2008 (EST)rcevoli 1 Feb, 2008

 * it appears to be back. (WT-en) Kire1975 22:16, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Joyce
I added a mention of Nora Barnacle's house and see this sparked an edit skirmish. Just to clarify: the aspersions against James Joyce's writing style are only to relate Nora's own oft-expressed complaints - I wouldn't put my own opinion here. By all means amend if that's not clear from the text. Grahamsands (talk) 09:23, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

 * Don't worry, you can put in your own opinion into Wikivoyage (as long as it's not insane and/or offensive, or as they call it round these parts "fair"). As for the James Joyce stuff, it clearly adds colour to the experience of reading this article and should stay. I've encountered a dynamic IP editor before who tries to edit all the fun stuff out of Irish articles.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * So Padraig comes for a job in construction, and the hiring boss says "So can you tell me, what's the difference between a joist and a girder?"
 * "Sure, everyone knows that. Joist wrote Ulysses and Girder wrote Faust." Grahamsands (talk) 07:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Laughing. Out. Loud. more than just an acronym. Ground Zero (talk) 12:01, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

County edits
See County Galway discussion page for some proposed mergers. The only one directly relevant to the city is to merge / redirect Castlegar here - it's got the racetrack and that's all. Grahamsands (talk) 18:01, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Suspect typo
from Correct typos in one click ffrench->french? (omit) context: Blake, Bodkin, Browne, D'arcy, Deane, Font, ffrench ffrench, Joyce, Kirwan, Lynch, Martin, Morris,

title: Talk:Galway


text:
Talk:Gambia

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

from main page:

To learn about the wildlife of The Gambia visit for information on newly published (2009) photo-based field guides, including general fauna and flora, butterflies, spiders and other arachnids.

How come the "sleep" section only refers to high-priced luxury hostels? It seems that low-priced bed&breakfeasts are quite common in Gambia...

Regions
Gambia is absolutely tiny - no more than 30 miles wide in any part. It is though perhaps the least OtBP of all the West and Central African countries (thank the British package holiday industry!). As well as the obvious package deals, travellers and the ecologically-inclined take advantage of the very cheap charter flights (from Britain at least) for more adventurous exploits. But even given all that, I do not think the country needs travel regions. At the moment we follow the administrative split into 6 regions, but having been from one end of Gambia to the other, I can say that is not at all necessary. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:41, 27 January 2010 (EST)

 * I was looking at this earlier and was thinking there may be at least 2 regions...th coastal area where the Gambia River is wide and an upriver area. So there's really no difference?(WT-en) AHeneen 06:15, 27 January 2010 (EST)

 * It is small. The upriver areas do have some more wild stuff. But the major National Parks are actually in the western half, sort of middle river. The bucket-and-spade resorts are obviously all in the coastal bits. So you could at a pinch do a divide based on that, perhaps even into 3. I am though ever more wary of dividing these very small countries. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 06:25, 27 January 2010 (EST)

 * We only have 3 articles now, so subdividing it further doesnt seem to make any sense. And it is a small country. I wouldn't call it OTBP though, I see package deals to Gambia all over at the local travel agency here :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 16:24, 27 January 2010 (EST)

 * I said it was the least OtBP of all the West and Central African countries! And my proposal is not to sub-divide further but to have no regions at all. Least is the key word :). --(WT-en) Burmesedays 03:18, 28 January 2010 (EST)

 * It surprises me that Gambia is so popular for Brits. Is it really the most visited nation in the region? I would have thought Senegal, Ghana, and Nigeria would be the major destinations (Nigeria not being for tourists, though). (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 02:21, 28 January 2010 (EST)

 * It would certainly not be the most visited country in the region. Nothing like, as it is absolutely tiny. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 03:18, 28 January 2010 (EST)

 * I was fully on board with having no regions... until I saw that the Western Gambia article is somewhat developed already. If for no reason than that it will make my content organization job easier, I'm now tempted to go with AHeneen's basic idea. That is: Western Gambia or perhaps Coastal Gambia and Upriver Gambia. The latter would be spare, but that's OK—while we don't have any content for it yet, there is potentially enough to fill a region article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:52, 21 February 2010 (EST)

 * It will not do any harm to organise in that way. On the other hand, it is also not necessary in my experience. I would not object either way really. Nobody visits the upriver bits on anything more than an organised day cruise, bar a very few intrepid souls wanting to get into interesting parts of Senegal, and the keen wildlife observers (obsessive birdwatchers mainly I seem to remember). --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:38, 22 February 2010 (EST)

Eliminate regions
You can see the sum total of Upriver Gambia coverage in the sole blue link in that regional article: Janjanbureh. (And I'd note that Janjanbureh is already linked in Gambia.) For that, we don't need an entire regional structure. Is there any good reason not to do away with the regions? OK, yes, there are some nice things in the Western Gambia article, but can't they be merged into Gambia? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree. Not a useful subdivision. Ground Zero (talk) 02:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree and urge someone to g forward already as those kinds of discussions have a habit of dying down unresolved. Hobbitschuster (talk) 03:22, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Gambia
Add a warning box... Apparently there's some political instablity in Gambia right now.

I tried to use a concise wording, but would appreciate a second opinion.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

 * Looks alright to me. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Isn't the official name of the country "The Gambia"? The article should be a bit more consistent about this. --Fuaran buidhe (talk) 12:06, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There has been a long discussion about this at the Wikipedia article on the Gambia. If you want to propose a change in Wikivoyage, I suggest you do it at Talk:Gambia. Ground Zero (talk) 15:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oddly, the Beeb raises this point: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-38675804 K7L (talk) 04:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Has the situation calmed down?
From what I heard on the news, the old President has finally relented and the newly elected President has been able to return to Gambia, giving hope to a return to normalcy in the foreseeable future. When will it be time to remove the Warningbox? Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:26, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The UK has backed off its warning "Updated: 23 January 2017 - the Foreign and Commonwealth Office no longer advise against travel to The Gambia; the situation has stabilised and the possibility of a military intervention is no longer likely." None of the other four governments cited (AusNZ, CanUSA) have updated their warnings to reflect the current situation. Would downgrading this to a cautionbox break the links to the various western diplomatic corps sites at the bottom?
 * Then again, "the country remains deeply divided after a bitterly-contested presidential election" is the sort of pointless, vague statement which could just as easily award warningbox to another country which is now turning away peaceful protesters at its borders. K7L (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Warning box If some relevant state departments no longer hav ewarnings, then we probably shouldn't either. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Move to The Gambia
I suggest moving this to The Gambia to match Wikipedia (w:Talk:The Gambia) and Commons (Commons:Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/12/Category:Gambia), this was discussed above a while ago but unlike Netherlands where "the" is an independent modifier it is actually part of the country's name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose – three things:
 * Our article on Bahamas does not include a "the", and "the" is also part of the Bahamas' country name
 * How many categories and links are we going to break by moving such a high-profile page?
 * What's wrong with the current name? This is not Wikipedia, and we don't need to match our article name with Wikipedia's.
 * With that said, I do see some advantages in moving it. It helps distinguish us further with The Other Site, and may boost SEO rankings. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Naming conventions, where the Gambia is specifically mentioned. Therefore the proposed move may require a policy change. Vidimian (talk) 12:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

 * Oppose. But if we do that, Bronx has to be The Bronx. I was going to suggest a redirect, but we already have one, so we're covered. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Naming conventions in this case (as with the Bronx and the Bahamas which should also be moved) "The" is a fixed part of the name so this example should be modified, as far as I can see the only category that would need to be moved is Category:Gambia and the links will still point to the correct title. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If we decide to use "the" in the names, they need to be alphabetized on the word after "the". I still oppose, but if we do move it, I'd suggest "Gambia, The" like a dictionary. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes we would still sort under "Gambria, The" as standard namely like The Hague is sorted under "Hague". Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Moving the category isn't as simple as moving it, as there will be many breadcrumbs underneath it which will then point to the redirect. One is already covered, while the other (Sydney/The Rocks) would be misleading if there were no "the". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if we don't move this article we should probably replace the Gambia example at Naming conventions with a different one as the guideline would contradict its self a bit. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't contradict anything if we maintain the name as is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Because "The" is a fixed part of the name per the "Exceptions" part so the guideline says that "Gambia" should not have "The" in the article name yet it is a fixed part of the name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gambia


text:
Talk:Gamla

Uh, this was stuck in the Gamla article...

Qatzrin (Hebrew: קצרין) is the largest town in the Golan Heights, population approximately 7,000.

Understand
Qatzrin was established in 1977 as part of an Israeli program of cementing Jewish presence in the Golan Heights, considered essential to Israel's ongoing security and territorial integrity.

Get out
As the primary tourist centre in the Golan Heights, Qatzrin forms an ideal base for exploring nearby sites of interest, such as Gamla.

Qatzrin

title: Talk:Gamla


text:
Talk:Ganga

VFD Discussion
According to Project:Bodies of water, articles about bodies of water isn't valid as an article.
 * Delete -User:(WT-en) SnappyHip 18:14, 15 March 2010 (GST)

 * Speedy redirected per Project:Deletion policy. Presumably this could be made a travel topic, but this was not, and it should anyway be entitled "Ganges." --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:49, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

Result: Redirect. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:49, 2 May 2010 (EDT)

Ganges River
I wanted to create an itinerary article on the Ganges River. As of 21 December 2022, Ganges redirects to Salt Spring Island (in Canada) and Ganga redirects to India. I looked at Talk:Ganga and found that Ganga used to be a separate article before being deleted in 2010 (before Wikivoyage was a separate entity). So I'm wondering whether the Ganges River is a valid itinerary topic. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 05:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 * By what means of transport would you cover the itinerary? If it's reasonably doable, sure it's a valid one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I want to cover it by boat. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 06:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure. Is it easy to hire a boat or sign up for a boat tour? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 * See Along the Yangtze River, Along the Paraguay River, Along the Yellow River & Along the Grand Canal for examples of this sort of article. Pashley (talk) 23:55, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

 * The Grand Trunk Road & the Ganges are near each other for a long distance. Pashley (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

 * I changed Ganges from redirect to disamig page. It should link to some article for the river -- perhaps the one Sbb1413 proposes -- but doesn't yet. So should the two Indian towns which have links to Ganges, & Ganga should redirect there. Pashley (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ganga


text:
Talk:Gangotri

? wethar

title: Talk:Gangotri


text:
Talk:Gangwon

Urgent message for User:Okay95
ALL the content and images in the Gangwon article that you have contributed is about to be deleted. This is being done for copyright violation reasons. Some of the content appears to have copied from other website(s). This is unacceptable behaviour. Unless you can explain where the content originates from, and what right you have to copy it, ALL the content and images that you have contributed could be deleted without further warning. You need to discuss this now, before you make another edit. -- (WT-en) Huttite 03:44, 19 Jan 2006 (EST)

Copied content
Some of the florid prose ("sure to excite the most rabid aficionado"?) is almost certainly copied from somewhere else -- but where? Google can't find it. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:59, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * Yeah, that's what I was wondering, too. It seems to be copied in toto rather than edited and re-edited, but I can't find any clues. --(WT-en) Evan 01:00, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * You're wondering where an extlink happy contributor gets his stuff? CLICK THE LINK LUKE!  It's reworded, but it's still plagerism. -- (WT-en) Colin 02:50, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * The link is http://eng.gwd.go.kr/ -- (WT-en) Huttite 17:32, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * User:(WT-en) Okay95 has posted on User talk:(WT-en) Okay95 a fax from the Gangwon Provincial Government. I am of the opinion that it permits the text of the website to be copied but NOT the images. Can others confirm this opinion? -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:06, 20 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * It says "pictures". --(WT-en) Evan 11:27, 20 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * And the fax is quite correct in stating that the GPG retains the copyright of the images.   I think the bigger problem is that the fax gives Ms. Hong permission to use the content, without saying anything about the CC by-sa licensing. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:33, 21 Jan 2006 (EST)

Regions hierachy
Gangwon-do actually breaks down into a number of Si and gun (counties and cities?). From the provincial website dropdown box - (which is a very bad way of promoting your region because all the URL's are probably hidden from google and implies poor website design) I obtained this list of regions and their websites: I am not sure if the Si or gun should be part of the region name. It would be useful to list these under the Region section in Gangwon and move a lot of the information in Gangwon into individual region and city articles. However there are probably still too many and it might need to be broken down further, like near the DMZ or North Gangwon and South Gangwon. However, I do not know enough to say what is best. Any thoughts? -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:07, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * Chuncheon-Si = http://www.chuncheon.go.kr/Eng/
 * Wonju-Si http://english.wonju.go.kr
 * Gangneung-Si http://www.gangneung.gangwon.kr/english/main.jsp
 * Donghae-Si http://www.donghae.gangwon.kr/english/index.htm
 * Taebaek-Si http://tour.taebaek.go.kr/english/index.asp
 * Sokcho-Si http://sokcho.gangwon.kr/foreign/eng/
 * Samcheok-Si http://www.samcheok.go.kr/eng/
 * Hongcheon-gun http://www.hongcheon.gangwon.kr/english/index.htm
 * Hoengseong-gun http://hsg.go.kr/eng/
 * Yeongwol-gun http://gun.yeongwol.gangwon.kr/english/
 * Pyeongchang-gun http://new.happy700.or.kr/esite/eindex.htm
 * Jeongseon-gun http://jeongseon.go.kr/JStour_EN/index.html
 * Cheorwon gun http://www.cwg.go.kr/english/greetings/greetings_01.asp
 * Hwacheon-gun http://www.hwacheon.gangwon.kr/english/html/main.html
 * Yanggu-gun http://www.yanggu.go.kr/html_en/index.html
 * Inje-gun http://www.inje.gangwon.kr/english/main.asp
 * Goseong-gun http://eng.goseong.org/
 * Yangyang-gun http://www.yangyang.gangwon.kr/htmlfunc/eng/index.html

 * -si is city, -gun is literally village, although both in Korea and Japan gun usually denotes large rural areas with little population. They should never be used in article titles.

 * At any rate, I don't think further division into subregions is necessary. The -sis should go under Cities and the villages should be omitted. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:20, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * The Gangwon-do website has a map that indicates the -gun are counties (under road information). So I think the -guns should become regions. -- (WT-en) Huttite 23:05, 17 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * My bad, you seem to be correct — in Japan the gun is a historical relic but in Korea they are indeed still used as districts covering multiple towns and villages . However, note that the cities and counties are exclusive, so eg. Hoengseong-gun does not include Hoengseong-si.  This sounds pretty prone to confusion as a region hierarchy if you ask me... (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:39, 18 Jan 2006 (EST)

Updating for 2013
Looking at the history, this article has not been touched much since 2006! Additionally the 'style' issues have not been addressed at all for 7 years. I will copy edit this and some of the sub articles belonging to it. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

 * After some work I am getting the article under control! I am providing an update just in case anyone is following this.
 * After cleaning up the listings, it appears many provide no indication of which town or area they belong to, there I need to check each one's location using Google and then move to the relevant town.
 * When this process is complete, we can rebuild the Gangwon region article into a useful one drawing on the best of all the towns. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and tagged the See and Do sections with movetocity, which was made for such cases and puts the page into a maintenance category, where others can find it and help out. Texugo (talk) 14:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Many thanks Texugo ! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Looking at the history it looks like you've done a good job with Gangwon two months ago, 앤드루. And the article doesn't look as hair-rising as I remember it. Now there are a couple of Sees and Dos left in this article but as there doesn't seem to be any particular article to move them to I suggest we should leave them here. There are also too many cities in the list, I think we should move some of them down to Other destinations, and remove a few with very little content. Plus, most of what's in the "Outdoor recreation sports" doesn't include any contact or location information; I'll list the activities in a sentence or two and remove the fluff. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Yes, I got the article to a point and then decided to take a break :) Basically there are only two 'cities' in the province and the rest are actually tiny towns or villages that are widely dispersed. Do you have any ideas how to structure them better? Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I'll remove destinations that are just "counties" from the Cities list - those who are usable or important like Pyeongchang I'll put on the Other destinations list. and move them to the other destinations list. I checked out "what links here" for each of them and no article links to (all but one of) them if they're deleted completely. ϒpsilon (talk) 11:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Another thing to consider is that some articles could probably have content removed and just point to the DMZ_(Korea) article instead. I wasn't sure about how to proceed with that because the DMZ covers more than just Gangwon province, however I think it still works. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I think we should be careful about moving things not really related to the Korean War or the current situation in the region into the DMZ article. What's in Goseong (Gangwon) could very well be merged into the DMZ article, though. ϒpsilon (talk) 11:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I understand although I have actually treated the DMZ as a kind of National Park article. The listings are either of interest because of the Korean War, the subsequent 50 year armistice or of the de-facto nature reserve aspect of the area. I think Cheorwon for example can just redirect to the relevant heading in the DMZ. Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:50, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Yes, when cleaning up the article I ran into a couple of other places that could be incorporated into the DMZ article as well, including Cheorwon. On the other hand something like the fun festivals I spent half an hour de-Konglishfying wouldn't really "fit" in there with the barbed wire and bunkers... ϒpsilon (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Sure. Good work :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:51, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Seorak-san_National_Park
Seorak-san_National_Park is a well defined article, and it seems there is a lot of content about this park in the Gangwon article that should really be merged into the park's article. Does anyone have any objection to this merge? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:59, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Connected Contributor
$ This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that he has been paid by Korea Press Foundation & Gangwon Province for his contributions --책읽는달팽 (talk) 12:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gangwon


text:
Talk:Ganja Region

Orphaned cities
The following are city articles with no content, but that fall in this region and are orphaned:

 * Agdash
 * Agstafa
 * Barda
 * Daskashan
 * Gadabay
 * Goranboy
 * Khanlar
 * Samukh

If content does develop for these and the more important destinations within this article, we may want to subdivide the region. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 16:16, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Red links from the article
If someone starts articles about any of these places, please restore them to the article:

 * (Bərdə) – Ancient Capital of Caucasian Albania, located on the Tartar River.
 * (Mingəçevir) – The city is crossed by the Kura River that divides it into two.
 * (Şəmkir) – Another by Germans populated town. There are cognac and wine plantations.
 * (Xoşbulaq) – Most Ganjalis spend their vacations and summer weekends in this village.
 * (Nəbiağalı) – The most populous village in the Samukh district.
 * – Once the majority of Armenians and has its significance where the treaty was signed in 1813.

Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Pining who knows this area better. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:31, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I wish I could help, but unfortunately, I don't know too much about Azerbaijan. Roovinn (talk) 04:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 * I have readded four of the removed towns again, because they have enough information with them to be useful for travellers. I believe it doesn't make sense to only mention places that have their own article, that would remove a lot of content from WV. Also, I am not aware of a policy that would remove such information, unless it is a listing without any information attached to it.
 * I understand that the red can be annoying but that is only the presentation on the website, not in OsmAnd for example. Also, the argument in the past was that this would potentially attract editors willing to create new articles. This wouldn't happen if the information wasn't there in the first place.
 * Either way, it is probably better to just use the wikidata id anyways, the rest is done automatically.
 * Cheers Ceever (talk) 12:01, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ganja Region


text:
Talk:Gansbaai

Copyright violations
I am reverting this page to an empty outline. There are simple far to many copyright violations here.

Some of the violations I have found are:
 *
 *
 *
 *
 *
 *

title: Talk:Gansbaai


text:
Talk:Gaoyou

Much of this text is a copyright violation from http://www.halfthesky.org/work/sites/gaoyou.php We cannot use other people's stuff here unless they formally release it under our Creative Commons license. I'm not certain all of it is copyvio, though, so will resist the urge to just delete all the text. I don't have time to figure out what, if anything, can be kept. Does someone have time to fix this? (WT-en) Pashley 07:59, 7 November 2007 (EST)

I wrote the original WikiTravel article AND the Half the Sky article. Simular information is also found on my website www.aboutgaoyou.com. C. Day 12/27/07

title: Talk:Gaoyou


text:
Talk:Gap year travel

Gap Year information
A lot of travellers are in the position of taking a "gap year" after studies, for a career break, for a life change, etc...... An increasing focus in these gap years seems to be the chance to do volunteer work, try new experiences, visit exotic locales, etc - witness the recent Guardian writeups in their Travel section. Would it be worthwhile, do you think, for Wikivoyage to address this phenomenon with a series of articles offering advice, ideas, suggestions, alternatives, etc? (WT-en) Pjamescowie 07:19, 1 Aug 2004 (EDT)

 * I think Gap year travel would make an excellent travel topic. I'm not sure it's a big enough topic to have multiple articles about, though. --(WT-en) Evan 18:18, 19 Aug 2004 (EDT)
 * Looks like no one has been here in a while, but I'm willing to take this topic on. I haven't gone to college yet and graduate high school in August 2004. I spent several months in Munich and Warsaw. - 216.196.215.81 01:22, 16 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Working holiday
I wonder whether this article as it stands would be better named Working holiday? It's not hugely specific to the gap year crowd (18-25 year olds taking a year out of education). (WT-en) Hypatia 21:26, 16 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I think there is room for two articles since the audiences are rather different and the rules for working holiday visas fairly strict. Pashley (talk) 16:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible links?
Cleaning up the Volunteer travel article, see Talk:Volunteer_travel. Text removed there includes a whole section on gap year things, copied below. Other things removed there might also be used here; see the talk page there both for a list of those and for discussion of why some should not be used. Pashley (talk) 17:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

From other article
There are many organisations offering gap year placements. A few of these are:

 * EXIS a 30 year old Danish organization that specializes in volunteering, internships and/or language/cultural stays in around 20 countries across the world.
 * Frontier Conservation specialises in scientific and conservation projects in locations such as Tanzania, Costa Rica, Cambodia, Fiji and Madagascar.
 * Global Vision International is an award winning volunteer abroad organization running projects all over the world.
 * Gap Year Diver, specialists in gap year and career break scuba diving trips. Marine Conservation initiatives, learn to dive, become a Divemaster, teach in local schools, community work, Instructor training, language learning and much more.
 * The Great Projects . Beginning life as the multi award winning 'The Great Orangutan Project', the Great Projects now offers a wide collection of projects, used to showcase working models of animal conservation tourism around the world and promotes the importance of setting standards in endangered animal welfare and conservation in the tourism sector.
 * Yomps, Gap year, career break and adventure specialist, from volunteering in Africa to learning to surf in Ecuador, Yomps has it all.
 * Shumba Experience Specialists in conservation and veterinary projects in South Africa, Botswana and Namibia.
 * Global Vision International, Specialists in gap year expeditions such as marine expeditions in the Indian Ocean and exploration in Patagonia. GVI also has over 150 volunteering projects around the world.
 * Gap Medics, Specifically aimed at students looking to go to medical or nursing school - Work experience and volunteer opportunities in The Caribbean, India and Tanzania.
 * Gap Year Ghana, small organisation specializing in volunteer placements in Ghana, West Africa.
 * Raleigh Youth and education charity offering challenging environmental, community and adventure programmes for 17-75 year olds in Borneo, Costa Rica & Nicaragua and India
 * Projects Abroad, Global organiser of overseas voluntary work placements. Projects Abroad runs placements like Teaching, Care, Conservation & Environment, Medicine & Healthcare, Sports, Culture & Community projects and Journalism.
 * VAE Kenya, a small UK organisation that organises challenging teaching placements in rural Kenyan schools.
 * Praktikawelten offers more than 300 volunteer projects in 17 countries as well as work and travel programs in Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
 * FruitFriends is a locally based organisation in Vang Vieng; Laos. FruitFriends provides immersion through volunteering. Positions available for: social enterpreneurship, teaching English, farming, building, community-based activities.
 * Rainbow Garden Village A NGO Volunteer Organisation operating in 32 countries across the globe since 1999.

Additional possibilities

 * NICE Network organising internships and volunteerings, as well as offering Spanish courses for foreigners in Argentina who are seeking to discover, live and learn in this South American country

Working holiday visas?
Working holiday visa has much detail on these visas & I've met a fair number of travellers who have used them, mostly people from North America or Europe visiting Australia. We have no article on them. Volunteers? Pashley (talk) 07:29, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've been on a Working Holiday Visa before and am happy to help if I can, however I'm fairly new to Wikivoyage and am not sure what is needed. How will the Wikivoyage article need to differ from the Wikipedia article? Misaochan (talk) 00:10, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * The Wikipedia article covers the technicalities of the visa well, but doesn't say much about actually going on a working holiday. Things like how to get a good balance between work and travel, maybe suggestions about when to go (before university, between university and your first job etc). Any preparation worth doing before setting off (e.g. getting experience or qualifications at home first), and whether it is good to get a job or interviews arranged in advance. Some stuff is country specific, and there was a discussion a while back about having articles on "Countryname for a longer stay", which might be the best way of handling that kind of specific information. AlasdairW (talk) 00:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * You might get some ideas by looking at somewhat related articles: Working abroad, Gap year travel, Volunteer, Teaching English, maybe even Retiring abroad. Pashley (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 * We now have Working holiday as a redirect to Working_abroad. That section could likely be improved. Pashley (talk) 21:46, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

External links on this page?

 * Is it be correct to assume these two external links would be out place on this page?

72.213.195.8 23:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_year
 * https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gap_year
 * Not at all, but we prefer to keep inter-project links in the sidebar, where the Wikipedia link already was. I've added the Wikiquote link to the Wikidata item for the page, and now we have both links. Thanks! ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 23:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

The Onion
More Souls Deferring Entrance To Heaven For A Year To Backpack Through Spirit Realm Pashley (talk) 09:51, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gap year travel


text:
Talk:Garden City, Surfside Beach

Merge
This article is improperly named, and appears to duplicate content for both Garden City (South Carolina) and Surfside Beach, which are separate municipalities. Any reason not to merge? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:42, 3 March 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Garden City, Surfside Beach


text:
Talk:Garden Route

Article Title
This article should be called Garden Route not Garden Route (South Africa) as there are no other articles by that name in other countries. I moved the page to align with the article naming conventions. There is no need to disambiguate the page, yet, and it can always be moved back to the disambiguated page if there is another Garden Route somewhere else in the world. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:51, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

 * That is what I did with the Cape Winelands today, so I don't have to write Winelands (Western Cape) all the time...

Cheers, Felix (WT-en) Fluglotse2000

title: Talk:Garden Route


text:
Talk:Gariep Dam

Gariep Dam

 * Delete. Activities around the dam should be handled by articles for the towns Oranjekrag (need to check this name, might be politically incorrect in the new South Africa and been renamed), Oviston and Bethulie. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) NJR ZA (talk • contribs)

 * Keep - redirect to nearest town (or if all else fails to Free State) ~ 61.91.191.11 03:24, 4 February 2007 (EST)

 * Redirect to Colesberg, and make the dam an entry under "Get out". -- (WT-en) Ryan 01:28, 7 March 2007 (EST)

 * Keep - So many changes in South Africa over the last couple of years that it is hard to keep up. The small supporting village (originally called Oranjekrag) next to the dam was actually proclaimed a town in October 1996 and is officially called Gariep Dam. I've updated Gariep Dam to reflect this and will add some detail on the page. --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 03:29, 7 March 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Gariep Dam


text:
Talk:Garland (Arkansas)

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

Comments
I am not sure how genuine listings for Garland City are, either here or elsewhere on the internet.

For example: The Home Girls Inn at 103 Mccash Street appears to be a non-existant address. Other directories list 102 McKay Street, which appears to be an intersection. Google Maps satellite imagery suggests this and other addresses identified as Garland City restaurants are either residential addresses, vacant lots or farmland. Unfortunately, there is no "Street View" imagery available to verify the authenticity of this listing. - (WT-en) Huttite 21:37, 20 November 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Garland (Arkansas)


text:
Talk:Garmisch-Partenkirschen

This is an orphan page. Is it "Garmisch-Partenkirschen" or "Garmisch-Partenkirchen"? --(WT-en) Nzpcmad 15:38, 15 Sep 2004 (EDT)

 * You are perfectly right, Nzpcmad. "Garmisch-Partenkirchen" is wrong and should be deleted. In German, "Kirchen" means churches, while "Kirschen" means cheries ;-) I'm goinig to add it to the Votes for deletion. -- (WT-en) Hansm 17:56, 2004 Sep 15 (EDT)

Moved from votes for deletion by (WT-en) Evan

 * Garmisch-Partenkirschen - Misspeled. The actual page is Garmisch-Partenkirchen. Delete it. -- (WT-en) Hansm 18:01, 2004 Sep 15 (EDT)
 * Keep. Common misspellings like this should turned into redirects (which I just did). (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:32, 15 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 * Keep. -(WT-en) phma 20:58, 16 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 * Keep. --(WT-en) Evan 15:26, 17 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 * delete JensANDMarian I created the misspelled page and corrected it later.

title: Talk:Garmisch-Partenkirschen


text:
Talk:Gary

Dotm
Wikivoyage simply needs to have Gary on the front page. Aside from more details for the casino and "other" section in "see," what needs to be done to make it so? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:43, 9 January 2010 (EST)

 * It's a beautiful and noble thought. Since last June, Gary's status as a Michael Jackson mecca has ramped up even further, so we'd need a firmer handle on what's going on Jackson-wise. I believe there's a childhood house (no longer owned by the family) that's open as a Jackson museum. There's probably more. Bennigan's needs data — are we sure the Gary branch survived the chain's collapse last year? (Some did, some didn't.) That covers a DotM (or OtBP more likely). For the article to go even further, we'd need to have details on the local bus service, strengthen the Get in by train details, and explain whether it's actually possible to get in by boat. And, of course, a map always helps. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:43, 9 January 2010 (EST)

 * One other thing — I'd want to know where I could rent a car locally if I were arriving via Greyhound or the South Shore. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:50, 9 January 2010 (EST)

 * I was at the Bennigan's after the chain collapse—I'll give them a call to double check. Hopefully Jackson mania means more internet presence for the city (for research). --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:18, 9 January 2010 (EST)

Bennigan's
Well, this is the first time I've been terribly sad to see a Bennigan's close. It is really a pretty big loss for the city... It survived the chain meltdown, but closed this year. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:39, 28 May 2010 (EDT)

 * <eat name="Bennigan's" hours="6AM-11PM address="500 5th Ave phone="+1 219 880-0566��" Two blocks west of the baseball stadium, is a bland pub-chain with outlets all over the country. The one in Gary, however, is a lot of fun. It's one of the very few sit-down restaurants anywhere near downtown, and it gets a lot of business accordingly. Weekends see live music (with some really impressive jazz musicians!), and the bar is hopping with Gary's small yuppie population. The daily deals are astounding—show up on Monday for a $3 chicken and waffles platter!. Politely ignore patently false claims to be the World's Largest Bennigan's. The restaurant is additionally useful in that it actually stays open after the downtown workforce goes home.

Jackson museum?
So it's said. Construction slated to begin in 2011. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:16, 3 June 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Gary


text:
Talk:Garzê

Bus table
I dont think this is the best way to present this information. It's goibg to be hard for other users to edit and to keep exact times up-to-date. It's better to have a few sentences that give the reader a general sense of the frequeny of bus service... (WT-en) Majnoona

(Information as 20 June 2005) The Bus Station is in the center of town just south of the main road.

yes, this html was an ugly remnant. Thank you for getting the lazy stone rolling again. What do you think about the wiki-syntax? Do you think this is easy enough to edit now? I actually came up with the idea of a timetable when I was traveling that part of China. It was extremely important to know at what time a bus would go, since there are usually only one or to departures a day. If you arrived later then the last departure, you had to spend the night in that town. On a 1 month visa a day more or less means being able to do the trip or not. I figure updating quite easy, since a Wikivoyageer only would have to correct/add the data of the particular connection he/she was traveling. The timestamp leaves it to the user if he takes the information for real or not. And last.. if you think "a few sentences that give ... a general sense" suffice, why didn't you write them? I found the page deserted of information about even where the bus stop is located after your edit. Have a good journey, --(WT-en) Ront 03:08, 11 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * Hi Maj,

title: Talk:Garzê


text:
Talk:Gaspésie National Park

Name
Is there a reason why this is under the French name instead of the English one? We don't use French names for anything else in Quebec (or France). (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:21, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Gaspesie National Park redirects here. It should not, since the park is a Quebec provincial park, not a national park, Policy is to use the commonest English name. I'd say the correct English name would be Gaspe Provincial Park. (WT-en) Pashley 11:35, 22 February 2009 (EST)

 * The article has now been moved to Gapesie National Park, which I think was a mistake even though it matches Wikipedia's title. [w:Gaspésie National Park] opens with:
 * "Gaspésie National Park (French: Parc national de la Gaspésie) is a provincial park located ...

 * This is a provincial park, not a national park. The confusion arises because the French word nation and English "nation" have somewhat different meanings, and both sides of the controversy around Quebec separatism add distortion beyond that. In French, referring to  Parc national de la Gaspésie is normal. In English, we should call it a Quebec provincial park.

 * If we do not move it to a better name, we at least need to add an explanation. Pashley (talk) 00:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I have moved it. Pashley (talk) 16:51, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

The official name is "Gaspésie National Park". Quebec is a recognized "nation" by the Government of Canada in both English and French, so it makes sense, and anyway it is the name the park is known, so it adds more confusion to use a different name on Wikivoyage than the reverse, it is better to use the name something is known as than the more "technically correct" name on Wikivoyage in my opinion. It has nothing to do with the difference between the meaning of the words "nation" in French and in English, they mostly mean the same anyway, it is just that Quebec government decided to use "national park" as a name for its "provincial parks", see New Brunswick who also use official French names, it doesn't use the name "national park" for "provincial parks", it is an official choice by the government of Quebec and I think Wikivoyage should follow it. It is how the park is known after all, and this is the most important factor for a traveler. Amqui (talk) 16:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Explanation copied from Wikipedia: "Note that both federally and provincially administered parks in Quebec are labelled "parc national" (national park). Federal national parks are distinguished by the addition of "of Canada" in their official name." . I don't think we should differ on Wikivoyage even if it doesn't fit the same standard as other Canadian provinces, it is a different region with different naming conventions. Amqui (talk) 16:41, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Pashley, your decision to move this article was overly hasty. In addition to Amqui's explanation, which is quite correct, we have the Google test: 66,200 hits for "Gaspesie National Park" vs. a measly 5,610 for "Gaspesie Provincial Park" (and, incidentally, only 2,300 for current article title "Gaspe Park", the bulk of which refer to an iron ore mine). At Wikivoyage the traveller comes first, and said traveller is far more likely to a) read parc national as "national park", b) hear this place referred to in English as "Gaspésie National Park" rather than "Gaspésie Provincial Park", and above all, c) not particularly care whether the park is run by Parks Canada or Sépaq. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

 * I don't think it was at all hasty; it was over five years from first pointing out the problem to acting to fix it.
 * The phrase "national park" normally has a specific meaning in English and that meaning does not apply to this park. Pashley (talk) 03:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Interesting history: I find it hard to imagine why anyone would think "Gaspésie" appropriate in an English title, though of course we should give the French in the text. As for "national", I can see the argument for it but I think it is unnecessary and maybe confusing for readers. Pashley (talk) 03:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * 2005, created as Parc de la Gaspésie
 * 2009, moved to Gaspé Park (me)
 * 2013, moved to Gaspé National Park (Amqui)
 * 2014, moved to Gaspésie National Park (Andre)
 * 2014, moved to Gaspé Park (me)

 * What would truly be "confusing for readers", Pashley, is if we steamrolled ahead either a) referring to the park by a name that few other sources use, solely because of the technicality of who runs it (in the case of "Gaspé Provincial Park") or b) referring to it by a name that no other sources use in an awkward attempt to split the difference between the two sides of the debate (the current title). From the traveller's perspective, there's very little effective difference between a national park and a provincial park: they're both large expanses of land, usually wilderness, owned by the government and set aside for purposes of environmental conservation and tourism. To get all hung up on the nitty-gritty particulars of which government organism is in charge of the park is irrelevant to travellers and, frankly, arguably an encyclopedic matter better suited for Wikipedia. That being the case, ttcf comes into play, and clearly the most useful title for our readers is "Gaspésie National Park".

 * Furthermore, I'm not 100% sold on your idea not to use the word "Gaspésie". The Google test favors "Gaspé National Park" over "Gaspésie National Park", but the English Wikipedia favors "Gaspésie". Furthermore, the place name "Gaspésie" has currency in English (Tourisme Gaspésie uses it in the official English-language version of their website, for example), and there's no precedent on Wikivoyage that names of national parks need to be transliterated into English (we have articles called "Utrechtse Heuvelrug National Park" and "Kongernes Nordsjælland National Park", not "Utrecht Hill Ridge National Park" or "North Zealand of the Kings National Park").

 * -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

 * The traveller may care if a park is federal or provincial if they hold season passes which cover one group of parks but not the other. There's also a perception that services in federal parks are more likely to be bilingual, due to the Official Languages Act (although in practice Québec tourism is marketed in both languages of economic necessity in any case). K7L (talk) 19:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Confusion among season pass holders is a minor issue that can be addressed in the article's "Understand" section, and I'm not sure why the fact that federal parks are "perceived" to be more likely to have bilingual services is relevant for our purposes if that perception is not, in fact, true (this is borne out by my own experience: on my trip to Quebec in 2012 I visited Gaspésie and Mont-Tremblant "National" Parks of Quebec and Forillon National Park of Canada, and basically everything in all three parks was presented bilingually).
 * I repeat: neither "Gaspésie Provincial Park", "Gaspé Provincial Park" nor "Gaspé Park" are anything approaching likely search terms. There are ways to note and describe the difference between the national parks of Quebec and Canada within the article, but changing the name of the article itself is a ridiculous overreaction that causes more problems than it solves.
 * I notice that other than myself, the three main participants in this discussion are a French-Canadian and two English-speaking Canadians. Perhaps we need an outsider's perspective. Ikan? Ypsi? Powers? Texugo?
 * -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * For naming controversies like this, I'm usually happy to go with whatever WP has decided. Texugo (talk) 20:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * My feeling is that there probably isn't such a famous English-language name for the park that it would be better to use that name than the official name. All the other names discussed in this thread can be redirects. Ta-da! No more confusion! Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * We should call the park the same as the ones who are in charge of the park call it. For other common names for the park we can make redirects. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Gaspésie National Park name matches up with WP entry - in WV this redirects to Gaspé Park - add a few more redirects if needed and a note containing the various AKAs (Also known as) in the main article Gaspé Park - even wilder would be the name : Gaspésie National Park (Parc national de la Gaspésie) -- I would keep it simple so Gaspé Park is fine - just a thought Matroc (talk) 21:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The official name of the park may be confusing, but it appears to be the best available choice. We can explain the import of the name in the article proper.  Powers (talk) 01:11, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks like we've got a pretty strong consensus here. Absent any unexpected developments, I'm going to change the article's title back to "Gaspésie National Park" imminently, and also add a section clarifying the park as run by the Quebec provincial government, rather than the Canadian national one, and mentioning that Parks Canada season passes are no good at Gaspésie. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Quebec (through Sépaq) is offering a similar pass for its "national parks" by the way, see the French article for more details if needed. The bilingualism is a moot point, you have more chance to have services in English in a big provincial park such as this one in Quebec, than in a small federal one in English-speaking Canada that have to offer services in French by law but in practice doesn't (or have only one or two staff bilingual "somewhere"), said from a French-Canadian living in Alberta, so let's not go there with that argument please. All that aside, I believe in the principle the traveler should come first on Wikivoyage and as such the name used in tourist guides, by the organization itself and on the road signs should be used while still mentioning other names in the page itself (and with redirects), in this case "Gaspésie National Park" (or maybe "Gaspé National Park"). Thanks, Amqui (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

All that being said, I agree with Pashley that "Gaspé" is the common name in English for "Gaspésie" (even though it is still technically in French...). In fact the name of the region "Gaspésie" becomes "Gaspé Peninsula" in English. However, "Gaspésie National Park" may be the right title given that we usually only translate the generic part of a name on wiki projects (parc national in national park in this case) and may be more useful for a traveler since signs in the province of Quebec are in French only and use "Gaspésie". Amqui (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of the "carte annuelle réseau Parcs Québec" (fr/en); all I'm saying is that a "carte réseau" from Gaspésie "National" Park won't work at Grosse Isle "National" Historic Site (or vice versa), even if Gaspésie's "carte réseau" is honoured sans question in Anticosti. K7L (talk) 00:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gaspésie National Park


text:
Talk:Gates of the Arctic National Park

Name
Should we rename this article "Gates of the Arctic National Park and preserve", leaving simply GotANP as a redirect? The "preserve" part incorporates a larger, but very similar area. The difference is that some activities (such as hunting) which are prohibited in the NP are allowed in the preserve. (WT-en) AHeneen 01:31, 13 June 2010 (EDT)

 * As with Denali National Park the "and preserve" seems sort of bureaucratic and doesn't conform with the "don't use official names" rule, so I'd be in favor of leaving it off unless there really is some ambiguity about what's being referred to.

 * As an aside, there have been a number of discussions around national park naming - a number of people were in favor (generally) of dropping the "National Park" part of the name (see Grand Canyon), but my preference has always been to include it. See Project:Naming conventions for the start of that discussion, noting that it spilled over into a few other places. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:47, 13 June 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Gates of the Arctic National Park


text:
Talk:Gatineau

The original content of this article was in French and is translated here (courtesy of Google.) -- (WT-en) Huttite 04:05, 6 Feb 2005 (EST)

Gatineau.

Maintenant le grand Gatineau depuis sa fusion. Gatineau a plus de 200 000 habitants et regroupe les anciennes villes suivantes : Gatineau, Hull, Aylmer, Masson-Anger et Buckingham.

Évidemment, je parle de ma ville en tant qu'habitante et non en tant qu'experte!

J'habite à Gatineau depuis 9 ans et j'adore! C'est une ville de grosseur moyen qui offre les services et divertissements des grosses sans en être une. On peut encore y retrouver des coins tranquilles sans avoir nécessairement à se taper une heure de route soirs et matins.

Gatineau est situé, géographiquement, à côté d'Ottawa. Donc, nous partageons plusieurs activités et festivals avec la Capitale. Il y a le festival de Blues, le Bal de neige, le festival des montgolfières, le festival des tulipes,etc. Pour ne nommer que ceux-là.

Nathalie

Gatineau

Gatineau is now much larger since its fusion. Gatineau has more than 200 000 inhabitants and gathers the old following cities: Gatineau, Hull, Aylmer, Masson-Anger and Buckingham.

Obviously, I speak about my city as a citizen and not as expert!

I have lived in Gatineau for 9 years and I adore! It is a town of medium size which offers the services and entertainments of a big city without being one. One can find quiet corners without having to drive for hours on the road mornings and evening.

Gatineau is located, geographically, beside Ottawa. Therefore, we share several activities and festivals with the Capital. To mention just a few we have the Blues Fest., Winterlude, Festival des Mopngolfières and also the Tulip Festival.

Nathalie corrigé par Claire

Train à vapeur
It looks like the Wakefield steam train will be out of operation for the next few years; I've noted this in "get in" and "do". C'est dommage... :( K7L (talk) 18:46, 17 October 2012 (CEST)

title: Talk:Gatineau


text:
Talk:Gatlinburg

Comments
Links need unpacking in this article. That is listings should show addresses and phone numbers so that travelers can print out a guide that is not reliant on following web links.
 * Another comment: this article is dangerously close in appearance to the yellow pages, rather than a travel guide. Can someone knowledgeable please trim down the listings and add descriptions to the remaining ones. Listings without any description are not of much use to travelers. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:28, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

 * I've done a massive trim of this article - it's always been one of our spammier articles, but the yellowpages list was borderline ridiculous and of almost no use for travel purposes. I've pulled the listings with the least information (just name, or name + address) and tried to add some formatting to a couple of others so that future contributors will have some idea of what they should be adding.  As a result the hotel list is probably ten percent of its previous size, and the restaurant list is probably one-third of its previous size. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:01, 6 March 2010 (EST)

I have a listing to add, but I'm not sure where it belongs. It's a shop called Ole Smokey Candy Kitchen. They sell candy, and a lot of taffy, made in store, is also for sale. SewChicago (talk) 05:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

 * If it's for takeout only, even when there's no pandemic, you can list it in "Buy". Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gatlinburg


text:
Talk:Gauteng

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

Hierarchy breakdown
Since gauteng is fast growing into one megacity it gets rather hard to break it up into pieces. The official District Municipalities map (rather than Local Municipalities) seems to be quite usable except for the border between Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni. A traveler will probably experience the western side of Ekurhuleni (''Kempton Park, Benoni, Boksburg and Alberton as part of Johannesburg. I'm going to break up the province according to the official districts for now, it that does no work we can later include the west of Ekurhuleni into Johannesburg and rename Ekurhuleni to something like Far East Rand. Any feedback on this will be welcome --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 14:38, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

 * Gauteng

 * Tshwane
 * Pretoria

 * Johannesburg

 * Metsweding (North Eastern Gauteng)
 * Cullinan
 * Bronkhostspruit

 * Ekurhuleni (East Rand)
 * Alberton
 * Edenvale
 * Springs
 * Nigel
 * Boksburg
 * Kempton Park
 * Tembisa
 * Brakpan
 * Benoni
 * Germiston

 * West Rand - The Randfontein, Westonaria, Merafong and Mogale municipalities
 * Westonaria
 * Randfontein

 * Sedibeng (Southern Gauteng) - The Emfuleni, Midvaal and Lesedi municipalities
 * Deneysville
 * Eikenhof
 * Heidelberg
 * Meyerton
 * Three Rivers
 * Vanderbijlpark
 * Vereeniging

Misinformation

 * The January 2008 Issue of the free tourist booklet Go Gauteng states: ...spend a day at the Boulders Shopping Centre - You'll need that long to see everything.... This is incorrect, Boulders is small compared to most other Gauteng malls and does not really cater for the tourist/traveller. --(WT-en) Nick 07:54, 20 January 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Gauteng