text:
Talk:Luxembourg

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

Please follow MoS guidelines
Unless and until our external links guidelines are changed, please don't add restaurant guides to this page. --(WT-en) Evan 13:41, 9 May 2005 (EDT)

Multilingualism
According to WP, Luxembourg shows nearly 100% trilinguilism (German, French and Luxembourghish). Can someone confirm this? User:(WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage

 * I don't see WP claiming that -- if anything, it states that some 300k people speak Lëtzebuergesch worldwide, out of 480,222 Luxembourg citizens. (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:55, 23 October 2007 (EDT)

 * By finishing their elementary studies in Luxembourg, everybody commands to a near-native level of German and also to French 100% sufficient to administer. Luxemburgish is spoken in every native family, it is maybe closest to German. As for immigrants, most children are able to converse in Luxemburgish, however the level of their skills may vary. Their parents rarely learn to speak it, as French (especially with some German knowledge) is more than enough to make themselves understood. Luxemburgers however regard it disrespectful or simply overly lax if foreigners do not even make an attempt to learn the national language. As for the "Talk" section. When I was there, I saw a number of road signs and other things written in German such as "einfaedeln lassen" or "Abstand beachten", nonetheless is the majority in French. Also in McDonald's, the menu is in German, but the cashiers are not likely to understand it in any other language than French (seldom English), as in most of the cases they are immigrants from former French colonies. Or at least that is what I experienced. I would be happy if someone local took a look at this section, because as far as I know, this topic is much more difficult and wants a more profound insight, when which langugae is to speak. I received strange looks when said something in the inappropriate language. They have stict rules (or rather habits) when how to speak. Many thanks, (WT-en) Ferike333 15:40, 3 October 2011 (EDT)

hotels.lu
I've tentatively restored hotels.lu -- it's not just an aggregator, but the official site of Luxembourg's independent hotel association ("Sélection des Hôtels-Restaurants indépendants du Grand Duché de Luxembourg Hotels.lu a.s.b.l."). Many of the smaller hotels listed within do not have homepages and do not show up in normal hotel booking engines, while the large chain hotels which do show up elsewhere (Hilton etc) are missing from hotels.lu. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:35, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

Get in entry requirements
In case anyone wants to know the source of my edits to include information about the visa exemption for 'Annex II' nationals to work during their 90 day visa-free entry, see this European Union document -. (WT-en) Yeahtravel 16:49, 6 June 2011 (EDT)

Districts
How about districtifying the Luxembourg article. Luxembourg is officially divided intro three districts and we can implement the same here. --Saqib (talk) 12:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there enough content to warrant it? Small nations like Luxembourg and Qatar often don't require districting. James A ▪ talk 12:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately not enough content James, but is it a good idea to create a region list such as this one? --Saqib (talk) 12:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, potentially. Some articles do it like that. I'd get a second opinion. James A ▪ talk 13:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * With only 5 (blue-linked) cities and 4 ODs, I don't really think this article needs subregions (as is the case with larger European nations such as Kosovo or Moldova). Actually, with a population of below 500,000, this would be a moderately sized city if it were elsewhere and would perfectly do with just a single article. However, the proposed breakdown may be posted directly here so it can provide an idea if a need for regions arises in the future, when we might have many more town articles. Vidimian (talk) 14:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Region list added. --Saqib (talk) 07:50, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Regions
So the current region breakdown does not seem to be based on any region articles existing. Recently the article Mullerthal was created which appears to be a very useful region from a tourism standpoint (which is what our region breakdwon should be based on), any ideas for how to divide the rest of the country? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Since the Mullerthal region is no more than a fancy name for the Echternach Canton, we could, in theory, include all 12 districs/cantons (See Wikipedia for reference). These would then have to be listed under the three existing regions (Diekirch-, Gevenmacher- and Luxembourg District) This would give:

 * 1) Diekirch District:
 * 2) * Clerveaux Canton (2)
 * 3) * Diekirch Canton(3)
 * 4) * Redange Canton (9)
 * 5) * Vianden Canton (11)
 * 6) * Wiltz Canton (12)
 * 7) Grevenmacher District:
 * 8) * Mullerthal (4)
 * 9) * Grevenmacher Canton (6)
 * 10) * Remich Canton (10)
 * 11) Luxembourg District:
 * 12) * Capellen Canton (1)
 * 13) * Esch-sur-Alzette Canton (5)
 * 14) * Luxembourg Canton (7)
 * 15) * Mersch Canton (8)
 * There is one (quite major) problem with this though: Coverage of Luxembourg (the country) on Wikivoyage. Simply put: It is poor. I don't think we should make these regions if these regions get little information on the pages. There may be a way of solving this though. If Projects are still actively maintained, then perhaps a Luxembourg Expedition (or a project alike) can be started. We'll get further if there are more of us, and an expedition project may be the thing we need to give the Luxembourg articles some of the love and care they need. -- Wauteurz (talk) 18:50, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * What about making Mullerthal a "city" (there is some precedent for consolidating several rural destinations into one city article) and not (yet) subdivide Luxembourg by region? We can revisit any proposal to do so once we get to above and beyond ~15 "cities" in Luxembourg. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:55, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Sounds like a plan to me. I'll see what I can contribute to this matter using the power of the internet. The previous times I've visited Luxembourg (I've been to both Diekirch- and Luxembourg District before going to Mullerthal earlier this month) were times at which I was too little to give anything about keeping folders or even appreciating the regions. But I'll see what I can do, and I would encourage other users to do the same. -- Wauteurz (talk) 19:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Hold on.. I agree that we need to consider carefully if and how to divide Luxembourg, but turning Mullerthal into a city article has some consequences. The article now holds listings for Echternach, which has a (linked) article of its own. That's not right. Mullerthal is a very well established region, famous for its natural beauty and hiking routes. It is promoted as such for touristic purposes and widely known as Little Switzerland in surrounding countries. The practice of consolidating rural destination in one city article is well established for small places with insufficient sights or facilities to fill articles, but Mulllerthal is a slightly different matter. This is a highly touristic area, full of places to see, stay and eat. Currently, the "get in" information and over half the listings in the Mullerthal article are in Echternach. If you want to go for a consolidated article, you'll have to merge the information and make sure that the get in and other information does not only refer to Echternach. However, it would be strange to have individual articles for, say, Remich or Clervaux, but not for Echternach. Alternatively, the Echternach information could stay in the Echternach article and is clearly linked from the Mullerthal article, which then only cover the rest of the region. I don't think it can be both at ones. JuliasTravels (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * There is little chance we could beef up our coverage of Luxembourg in a short time. I do not think the current arrangement is a problem, I would rather we don't touch it. PrinceGloria (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

 * So if I understand correctly, then new regions for Luxembourg (whenever they'd be created) should fit the following requirements:
 * Mullerthal is one of the regions (making it a sub-region of Grevenmacher would be useless, most listings would be located in the Mullerthal).
 * 15+ "cities" listed for Luxembourg.
 * Let me cut to the case here: One of the folders I've got about Luxembourg in general is an overview of locations and everything they have to offer. It divided Luxembourg as follows (using the map above):
 * Luxembourg region: 1, 7, 8, 9.
 * The Luxembourgian Ardennes: 2, 3, 11, 12.
 * Mullerthal: 4
 * Moselle region: 6, 10
 * Land of the red earth: 5
 * Alternatively the Land of the red earth could be included in the Luxembourg region. Though leaving it as a region of its own could be a good option seen that it has a history in mining, and the Luxembourg region does not. I'm currently working on removing the redlinks that are present in the article right now. Once all cities are included we'll have a total of 12 cities (counting Mullerthal as a region here). I have sufficient information (half of an A4 paper sheet or more) for the following, not yet existing redlinks per region (behind them the articles in that region existing right now):
 * Luxembourg Region: Mersch | Luxembourg City
 * Ardennes: Bourscheid, Esch-sur-Sûre, Wiltz | Diekirch, Clervaux, Ettelbruck, Vianden
 * Mullerthal: Beaufort, Berdorf, Larochette, Rosport | Echternach
 * Moselle: Mondorf-les-Bains | Grevenmacher, Mertert, Schengen
 * Land of the red earth: Differdange, Dudelange | Esch-sur-Alzette
 * These pages would get us to 23 city/town articles for Luxembourg. None of the regions have 7+ listings either. Of course we don't have to implement these right now, but they're good regions to devide Luxembourg into if you'd ask me. I'd like to know what you (more experienced WV users) think about this. -- Wauteurz (talk) 11:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Regions the Second
Alright, some days have passed since the past discussion on regions, and I can report that the progress made was bigger than what I expected. Right now (August 20th 2016, 15:30 UTC) we're down to a total of 18 cities, two of which are listed below Mullerthal, and the rest is listed below Luxembourg. Since I have planned at least 5 more pages, here's my final proposal for regions:

Notes The final layout and current layout can be found on an Userpage of mine.
 * 1) Colmar-Berg may end up being integrated into Ettelbruck or become a general listing. The main attraction (the castle) is closed to tourists and listing it may not have much of a use.
 * 2) Larochette is outside of the Echternach Canton (current borders for Mullerthal). Though VisitLuxembourg.com includes it in the Mullerthal region.
 * 3) I've started work on a Land of the Red Rocks article here.

In short, these are the same regions that the official tourist website for Luxembourg lists. I couldn't find a map on commons that lists the exact same regions, but linking to the website and hovering your mouse over the region names should do for now. The big plus of this layout is having the regions with common history (esp. LotRR) grouped together. None of the regions have over 7 pages this way, while keeping with the current three regions, will make the Grevenmacher District (and perhaps the Land of the Red Rocks too) too big on the long term.

Either way, I'd like to get some feedback from you all. If you have any better suggestions, then please, leave them below for us all to discuss. -- Wauteurz (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

 * You will more or less be on your own engaging in this. Please double-check with yourself if you have the stamina to deliver articles of at least reasonable quality, without resorting to laundry-listing or repetition, on each of the regions you proposed, create or pester somebody effectively to create maps and maintain all that so that it is reasonably up-to-date. PrinceGloria (talk) 07:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

 * PS. I looked into what you are doing in your userspace, and I have two comments. One is that all POIs (Eat, Sleep, See etc.) should go to bottom-level articles, i.e. "cities". Second is that destinations with no "Sleep" listings should not exist per policy, so if in a region only one or two towns have hotels, then reconsider whether to create articles for all townships in the region, or rather treat the region as a bottom-level article.

 * Thanks for the reply and feedback, PrinceGloria. I am totally fine with doing this on my own - that's mostly how we got here anyway. I'll definitely put the development of Luxembourg articles on hold if it gets in the way of my study or just gets too much for me in general, don't worry about that. As for maps, however, I've got a question: How can I find someone that can create the region maps for me? Is there any sort of category or list of users that may be willing to create maps for the Luxembourg articles? At the moment I haven't got a clue as to what I should do to even find someone willing to help me out with these maps or, as to what I should do and use to create one myself.

 * As for the userspace regions articles and their POI-problems, I'll take North Holland as a guide as to how to create such an article, correct me if there's anything wrong with doing that. As for the No-Sleep-Articles such as Differdange: I could subdevide Differdange in its commune, but that brings another problem: Differdange is a commune of itself. Differdange is part of the Esch-sur-Alzette canton, which is what I defined as the Land of the Red Rocks. I'll see what the best option for this problem is.

 * I'll check the ANWB (the Dutch Body of Federal Roads) their camping guide, they have a quite extensive list of Luxembourgian campsites. There aren't any hotels in Differdange, that I know for sure, but I am not 100% positive on it having no campsites either. If it has no sleep listings at all, then I may as well merge it with Pétange. -- Wauteurz (talk) 10:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

 * . This is what I meant - it's a big endavour, you are on your own and once RL kicks in, this stands a high chance of getting abandoned halfway.
 * . You are a fairly new editor which, with all due respect, doesn't help once you are on your own
 * . North Holland is not a very good example to follow, most of its subregions are horribly underdeveloped.
 * Please consider working on some bottom-level destination articles first before trying to redevelop the entire country coverage, even if for a country as small as Luxembourg. PrinceGloria (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Alright, understood. Would it be a solution to start a Luxembourg Expedition? I've suggested it before but got no solid answer to it. This would consist of defining the regions as well as making articles for the cities and towns that need them. It doesn't have to be a large scale expedition, which, seen the size of Luxembourg, would be quite unnecessary. Starting such an expedition doesn't seem like a bad idea to be because after all there's the Dutch saying "More hands make for lighter work". -- Wauteurz (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Expeditions don't help much. What does is slowly working on the articles of your interest and find that as you add original content, Google notices and sends in more and more readers, some of whom feel the urge to contribute and sometimes, voila, you have a team! PrinceGloria (talk) 12:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * PS. I prefer the Dutch sayings that have peanut butter in them :D

 * I'll continue to work on articles then. I'd love to see people help on them in the long run. I've updated my planned regions and articles. I'll go back to editing Gelderland articles sometime soon, giving new editors for Luxembourg some time to join in and edit. That seems like it would be the better option here. If nothing happens on the long term (say, half a year or so), then I'll have to fix the regions myself. -- Wauteurz (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * PS.: If nothing ends up happening, then we can use the Dutch sayings involving not just peanut butter, but peanut cheese (totally the same). If that happens, then we can all say "Helaas, pindakaas" together. :)

The dialect map
So I inserted a map of the Moselfränkisch dialect continuum which was removed by a single edit IP address. I think it is interesting to know that the language spoken in Luxembourg is closely related to the language traditionally spoken outside its borders, but I don't want to fight over this. What do you think? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:34, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Quite interesting to me, but I'm unsure how relevant it is for most travelers. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Seems to be a Wikipedia related information, not travel. I feel when it comes to language and dialect there is a great tendency to completely over-explain a very nuanced subject poorly. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:20, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Abolition of districts
According to User:Math1985, districts have been formally abolished. However, that doesn't mean using their former shapes is unhelpful for the traveller, so I reverted the deletion of the Wikivoyage regions and put some text into the past tense as a stopgap measure. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Are the districts now or were they ever of much use to travelers? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Having worked a lot on the Luxembourgian articles, I can say that I've mostly ignored them (aside from the is a city/town/commune in the ~ district intro lines). Technically the country article should be subdevided (as per 7+2) sometime soon, as there are 19 articles with one of them marked for a merge. Including the redlinked Luxembourgian pages we'd end up with roughly 22 articles. Dividing them into the Diekirch/Ardennes, Grevenmacher and Luxembourg districts might be the best options, though having Mullerthal as another region in this line-up is plausible. Dividing the currently existing articles results in 6 (Diekirch), 5 (Grevenmacher), 4 (Mullerthal) and 4 (Luxembourg) articles per region. Using the twelve cantons as a means of division isn't useful if you'd ask me, as we would end up with many single-destination regions with most others having perhaps two city level articles at best.
 * Please note that Larochette is counted to be part Mullerthal though officially being the Luxembourg district.
 * To answer your question, the districts aren't of use to the traveler in their current use, though Luxembourg should be subdivided as per WV standards, and the districts seem to me to be the best means of achieving that. -- Wauteurz (talk) 11:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Just checking.. so there are no current district articles right? Just a grouping of articles on the main article?
 * From my POV, it looks fine how it is... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Aside from Mullerthal (which, honestly, might be better of as a bottom-level article), there are no further subdivisions on Wikivoyage at the moment. If you need the overview, I have the category tree here. -- Wauteurz (talk) 17:31, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 * As far as I'm understand, there are two questions:

 * 1) Which districts to use in the list on the country page
 * 2) Whether or not to make district pages

 * For the question which districts to list: we currently use the three abolished administrative districts. They are not a great way of dividing the country: the division is rather arbitrary, and the districts generally lack a common character. They also did not have an administrative function in practice. Add to that the fact that the government quietly abandoned them.

 * The division in regions used by the tourist office, as provided by Wauteurz, seem very natural to me. These regions have a common character and history, which is useful for tourists to know. Some of the regions, in particular Mullerthal, are even known as tourist destinations in their own right.

 * So I'd propose to use this division on the country page.

 * For the second question, whether to make district pages, it seems we have three options:

 * 1) No district pages
 * 2) District pages with cities as children - it seems like Wauteurz has implemented this now
 * 3) District pages as cities (with no children)

 * In principle, we could also answer this question for different regions.

 * What are the (dis)advantages of each?

 * I'm new here, so let me know if I'm missing something.
 * Math1985 (talk) 22:06, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 * 1/4 The three districts may not be a great way to divide the country when it comes to bureaucracy, I can agree to that extend, however, when it comes to being helpful to the traveller, which as you probably are aware of, is one of our goals, it is quite the opposite. This way of dividing the country is useful to the extend that they maintain a clear overview to the average traveller that would be browsing WV. Destinations in, for example, the Grevenmacher district (including the Mullerthal in this case), are all located along the same Route National, which makes getting from Schengen to Echternach easy as long as the traveller has access to a car or bus service. For as far as I can tell, this isn't quite the case in the Luxembourgian Ardennes (Diekirch district). Instead, here we define the region by the terrain and history, which are for as far as I can tell the main attractions pulling in visitors to castles, museums, as well as hikers and (off-road) cyclists. The Luxembourg district combines the more urban regions with the more developed nightlife due to the young population in the bigger (university)cities such as Luxembourg and Esch-sur-Alzette, as well as industrial heritage on the side. Whether or not the government likes this way of dividing the country is not of use to us, nor the traveller, unless it directly limits their ability to visit for example Vianden whilst staying in Mondorf-les-Bains.

 * No, I believe the exact opposite, I think the three former regions are unsuitable from a tourist viewpoint. The main difference between the three former districts and the five tourist regions are:
 * 1) the Luxembourg-City area (mainly services and banking industry) and the Terre Rouge mining region are grouped together as district, while they have a totally different culture and will not likely be visited together; and
 * 2) The Mullerthal and Moselle region are grouped together; again, they are very different regions in terms of what tourists can expect there.Math1985 (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 * 1) I could be in favor of having five instead of three regions. Mullerthal is already its own proper region with four sub-pages. However, this does mean that we will have a single bottom-level region (Land of the Red Rocks). There isn't anything wrong with that, really, but from my point of view it gives a bit of an odd impression: Four proper regions and one bottom-level region. I understand where you're coming from, and right now I am conflicted about what has the highest priority; usable divisions or useful divisions.
 * 2) Yes, the Mullerthal and Moselle are grouped together in the three-way division. Since the Mullerthal is already a proper region in the current hierarchy, I would refrain from changing this.

 * As of right now I am looking for a four-way division; Diekirch, Moselle, Mullerthal and Luxembourg. I'd like to see some more people join the discussion. I'll most likely summarise this discussion thus far and post it in a subheading below, having the regular voting system kick in (oppose, support or comment). This change isn't very urgent, but as soon as I've got all the articles to usable or higher is when I'd like to focus on dividing the country, though this may be closer than seems to me. I highly encourage hierarchy change for Luxembourg, which is why I'll summarise the discussion later today. -- Wauteurz (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

 * 2/4 As for the district pages, you note three options: 1) No districts: Though this is the current situation, Wikivoyage guidelines oppose it. I've previously made attempts to get this guideline put into practice, though that hasn't yet given any results. I aim to put this into practice when I've completed my current attempts to enhance Luxembourgian bottom-level articles. Anyway, the twenty or so bottom-level articles are surpassing the norm thrice. Dividing them must happen.
 * 2) District pages with cities as children: This is generally how Wikivoyage is meant to be developed. Unless other ways are more useful to the traveller (for example; Land of the Red Rocks. You can see how it came to be at Talk:Differdange). I hope on doing the same for Mertert, Grevenmacher and Wasserbillig (Talk:Mertert), and perhaps Mullerthal should be reduced to this as well to keep overview, but that is a different subject in itself.
 * 3) District pages at bottom-level regions: I interpret this as having the new division implemented into Wikivoyage as city articles. This is a wrong mindset since our aim is to cover cities at the bottom level. Technically, this isn't wrong either. Land of the Red Rocks covers the fifth Canton (Esch-Uelzecht). This has been done to make the region, filled with cities, often bordering each other directly, more useful to the traveller, which we recon, will most likely stay in one city, and visit attractions not only there. Someone staying in Esch, might for example take a train to Pétange and take a heritage train to Fond-de-Gras or take the bus or car to Rumelange to visit the Musée National des Mines. Having all of these cities and communes independently listed makes it to where the traveller cannot see that Rumelange is fairly close to Esch, rendering them unaware of the town and what it has to offer. Since our goal is to cover cities, not districts, redirects from Differdange, Dudelange, Pétange, Esch and so forth have been made to the LotRR. There currently are some empty gaps, mostly in the Diekirch district, but these may pass. Sometimes there simply are places that are deemed dull and not worth visiting by tourists. We do not waste their time to cover the places they will not visit, instead we focus their attention on what they should and will visit.

 * The only real option here is #2, as it describes our guidelines, our manual of style.

 * This is not really clear to me. You say #2 is the only option, but it seems for Land of the Red Rocks you seem to have chosen solution #3. Will you use this solution only for this particular region?Math1985 (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 * LotRR came to be earlier this month when we merged the articles in the region. This we did because the cities alone don't seem to be as tourism heavy, the cities and towns there have city limits that are close to each other, making the region feel more as one big yet spacious whole. Besides, the locations here all have a common history. I wasn't the one who said that these city-style region articles have to be limited in numbers. I'll tag in he hope that he can clarify to you why this is. I can make my attempts, but I can't promise you that it will be entirely true. -- Wauteurz (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

 * 3/4 I am aware of the wall of text that I've just written, if you can't make sense of it, feel free to get in touch with me. I do not at all mind elaborating. Also, quick question for you: Are you a Luxembourgian citizen by any chance? If so, your help is much appreciated.

 * I'm Dutch like you, but I have been living in Luxembourg for 4 years.Math1985 (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Still, local knowledge is much appreciated. Until now I've been the only one with insider knowledge to Luxembourg as I've spent two 20-day vacations in the country, which leaves my knowledge limited. An insider has been lacking, and your contributions will be appreciated. -- Wauteurz (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

 * 4/4 Since I focus most of my efforts here on Luxembourg, I would appreciate it a lot if you'd help me out with my current attempts, which I see you've found already. Aside from that, we were all new here at some point. Not understanding or having trouble to grasp how we work is not wrong. If you ever need some clarification, reach out so someone :) -- Wauteurz (talk) 11:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Possible divisions (summary)

 * This is a summary and poll for the discussion above.

The three districts mentioned in the article have been abolished by the Luxembourgian government. The question we ask here is: Do we wish to divide Luxembourg articles, if so, how? Below is a table with the possible districts, complete with summary, articles, etc.: Five districts is plenty, and switching to the twelve cantons that officially replace the three districts leaves us with many regions with none, one or two articles each. The questions here are as follows: All opinions on the matter are appreciated, and I thank you in advance for yours. -- Wauteurz (talk) 10:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Aside from the Luxembourgian Ardennes, Moselle District and Central Luxembourg, which of the two districts mentioned above should be included, and how should they be implemented and changed according to you? Keep the following in mind:
 * 2) * The Mullerthal region is already part of our hierarchy.
 * 3) * The Land of the Red Rocks is currently a bottom-level region article at guide status. It can be implemented as such as part of Central Luxembourg, or as a stand-alone.
 * 4) Would you alternatively see a possibility in twelve bottom-level articles (see image) for the newly formed articles? This will most likely mean that we'll have to rework all existing articles for Luxembourg. Some articles (Land of the Red Rocks, Vianden) already fit this form. This division for tourists seems doubtful at best.

 * I have never been to Luxembourg, but I would ask what makes a compelling division for the traveller?
 * If you take a look at Germany (which is much larger) then you can see we only have 5 regions, and they do not follow official boundaries. It makes it easier to visit without being overwleming Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ah but we don't have articles on Central Germany or the likes. And we do subdivide some states into rather small regions like North Hesse Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We do not try to overwhelm the WV reader with pages, that goes without saying. As for the three options above, 12 is too much of you ask me. Especially if each one of those has 0 to 2 articles. I personally would like to see 4 or 5 regions as the three are an easy way to distinguish the three sides of the country: central, remote, river -perhaps not the best summation, but you probably see what I'm getting at. Mullerthal is already a region, and I support it remaining as such. I oppose making Land of the Red Rocks a proper region article as that would most likely mean that it will lose its guide status. I couldn't care less about whether it ends up as part of Central Luxembourg or as a standalone.
 * Furthermore, Luxembourg is due for division as per 7+2. A choice will have to be made. I mad my stance on the matter clear: four or five districts. Perhaps I am even slightly in favor of the division the Luxembourgian Tourism Bureau uses, for continuity's sake. If people need additional info, they shouldn't start from scratch, but be able to go through the same steps (divisions) to find information about their destination(s). -- Wauteurz (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with the five regions. Math1985 (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Get in
A lot of the information in Get in is duplicated between the articles about the country and the city. Should we de-duplicate this information? Where would be the best place for this information to go? Math1985 (talk) 21:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Having some duplicate information isn't bad per se. Especially concerning traveling by plane, duplicate information is almost logical. There is one international airport that I am aware of (Luxembourg-Findel), which mostly services the city. If you were to de-duplicate this, then the country would have no get in subsection about air travel, which at a quick glance makes it seem as though the country has no airports, which isn't the case. I'd say, leave it. Feel free to check the information in the get in section using Where you can stick it. -- Wauteurz (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

 * People headed for Luxembourg might also be flying into Hahn or maybe even some farther away airports like Brussels or Schiphol. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:25, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

New website of the Luxemburgish Teqball Federation
I can't get to the website https://www.teqballluxembourg.lu/ where I live.

To anyone who can access the website, does it have a map of teq tables for playing teqball?

Thanks for answering! -- Apisite (talk) 11:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Luxembourg


text:
Talk:Luxor

Do we need seperate pages for districts?

Some notes on buying silver:

Silver is traded at around 10.00 USD / Troy Ounce ( = 31.1 grams) [|commodity pricing on BarChart.com]

10.00 USD is around LE 55 [|currency converter on XE.com]

"Sterling Silver" contains 92.5% silver, so the silver content in each gram of Sterling Silver can be calculated as: 1g = LE 55 / 31.1g / 92.5% or LE 1.91 / gram

=> The silver in a 30gram Sterling Silver bracelet costs around LE 60.

Local charities
I removed the following from the "Learn" section, since it's not appropriate there. But maybe we need to have a way to link to, or mention, local charities? I know that for me and Maj, when we travel somewhere really poor we try and find a local charity that's doing good work there, so it's useful travel information in a way. --(WT-en) Evan 11:11, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Luxor


text:
Talk:Western Valley

Moved from article:

 * The Theban Mapping Project - combining the Atlas of the Valley of the Kings and the Atlas of the Theban Necropolis in a vast, award-winning Flash-based presentation - an amazing resource for the visitor

That page is cool so the geek in me can't delete it entirely. -- (WT-en) Nils 04:41, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * There's no need to delete it at all! The Theban Mapping Project includes documentation for the Western Valley - the links are not completely intuitive, I admit, but I have contacted Nicole Hansen of the TMP and she has said she'll look into improving them..... In the meantime, I'm gonna put the link back in place! (WT-en) Pjamescowie 06:49, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * In my eyes it definitely falls under the "other guide" rule, and should be removed. -- (WT-en) Nils 08:59, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * Yeh, well it is a guide - of sorts - but an academic one, not another travel guide..... the TMP contains a load of useful information that is really not part of Wikivoyage's scope - why not leave it in place for people to access should they want to? (WT-en) Pjamescowie 12:47, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * It is a secondary source. Read the external link policy. I'm removing it again from the article. If you still disagree, please discuss the external link policy before readding it. -- (WT-en) Nils 15:37, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * I do disagree. The TMP website is the closest thing you're going to get at the moment to a factual, commercially-disinterested guide to the tombs - at a level of detail which we probably wouldn't want to or couldn't replicate in Wikivoyage..... As the TMP is officially documenting the Theban necropolis with the support and encouragement of the Egyptian government authorities, how precisely does this represent a secondary source? It's not a travel guide, it simply presents the facts about the tombs in a very effective way...... As a professional Egyptologist and frequent visitor to Egypt, I think I'm on fairly safe ground here - I'm reinstating it! - please leave it in or invite arbitration. (WT-en) Pjamescowie 17:51, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * I do not care what you think. That website is run by some university, I can not find any information on their about page that states in clear letters that they are THE official source for information on teh valley and authorized as such by the Egyptian government. Ergo they deserve no mention on the article page. There are hundreds of webpages out there that are great sources of information for any traveller. And everybody has some favorites that just are "too valuable to not be listed". We are not building a web catalogue. The TMP is the kind of link that is great for WikiPedia, but it has no place in WikiTravel. As I said before, if you do not agree with the policy, then start a discussion and have people change it. Until that happens, the TMP shall not be listed on the article page. If it contains information you feel should be in the article, then add that informaion to the article. -- (WT-en) Nils 18:31, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * And a PS: I told you to start a discussion before readding it. How dare you take the right for yourself to ignore this request, then demand the same of me? You have quite some nerve. -- (WT-en) Nils 18:45, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * And a second PS: The style of the description of the external link also fits the definition of advertisement / spam in my eyes. -- (WT-en) Nils 18:48, 17 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Can you sleep there?
If you cannot, we should at least say so. Otherwise this is damned to perpetual outline status... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:35, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You can't sleep or eat there. --Kiaora (talk) 13:27, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Merge into Valley of the Kings
I propose to merge this article into Valley of the Kings. Supporting arguments:
 * 1) Western Valley is adjacent to Valley of the Kings.
 * 2) Western Valley has only one sight open to public access - Tomb of Ay. And it's very unlikely the number will grow in the nearest future. So basically an article is destined to describe mere couple of minor tombs.
 * 3) Tickets to Tomb of Ay should be bought at the ticket office in Valley of the Kings.
 * 4) There is no separate Wikipedia article Western Valley. Western Valley is described in Valley of the Kings. --Kiaora (talk) 13:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No one objected, so I'm going to proceed. --Kiaora (talk) 20:54, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Western Valley


text:
Talk:Lviv

Jewish history
Till the Holocaust a third of Lwow's population was Jewish, a fact ignored in this article. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 79.181.228.152 (talk • contribs)

 * If you see something incorrect or wanting, please plunge forward and improve the article! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:52, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

BSDM Pub
There's an adorable BDSM-themed pub in Lviv near Pl. Rynok. I can't remember the name for the life of me, but it should be added. —The preceding comment was added by 88.88.110.191 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We don't normally sign old comments, but whatever comments you sign with the unsigned template need to use and then the IP address or username. --Comment by  Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 20:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Time and date formats
Since the ugly, long winded and ambiguous 12 hour AM/PM format peculiar to the US is rarely seen in either the Western or Eastern parts of Ukraine, I would suggest we standardise on the shorter, more precise and less ambiguous 24 hour time format for all Ukrainian articles.

To use this standard format, here are some points to note:

Give times in the time zone local to Ukraine.

Always show two digits for the hour and two digits for minutes using a colon as the separator; eg: 09:00, not 09.00 nor 09-00 and not just 09 and never 09:0 or 9:00

Time ranges use a hyphen as the separator between the two times and are unspaced; eg: 09:00-17:30

Where an establishment does not close on a particular day or range of days, write 24h, not 00:00-24:00.

If the establishment doesn't close all week: 24/7

Choose to deviate from this standard, 24 hour format only to follow overwhelming local written usage. Ask yourself: "which format will visitors see in newspapers, on shop doors, and on train schedules?" If the answer is "a mixture", then use our standard 24 hour format.

Abbreviate to the minimum number of letters for clarity: M Tu W Th F Sa Su, especially in listings, but
 * spell out if it looks odd or ambiguous in a particular context or when it is part of a named day, eg: "Good Friday ", "Fat Tuesday ".
 * a range of days is shown with a hyphen: eg: M-Th specifies Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday and Thursday.
 * spaces should be left out, eg: M-F not M - F nor M thru F.
 * also include the dash for a pair of consecutive days, eg: Su-M not Su M.
 * for a list of days that are not in a range, separate the day abbreviations with slashes; eg: when a shop is open on Monday, Wednesday and Friday but closed on Tuesdays and Thursdays write M/W/F 08:30-17:30
 * when combining seasons, days or months with time, put the longer periods first. Seasons first, then months, then days and finally the times eg: Summer 18 May-13 Sep M-F 10:00-14:00.
 * when listing alternative date ranges (for example, seasonal opening hours) separate the alternatives with a semi-colon eg: Hall of Mirrors 3 May-8 Sep M-Sa 08:30-18:00; 9 Sep-2 May Th-Sa 10:30-16:00. Horror Maze May-Sep M-Sa 08:30-18:00; Oct-Feb F-Sa 10:30-13:00;
 * for all seven days, use Daily . Do not use "every day" or "Su-Sa". eg: Jun-Sep daily 08:30-11:00, 12:30-18:00

Use the date format of dd mmm yyyy, eg: 10 Jan 2003.

Abbreviate months to three letters: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec, especially in listings, but

 * if it looks odd or ambiguous in a particular context, spell it out.
 * avoid using dates such as 10/1/03, 10-1-03 or 10/1/2003 as this can mean 10 Jan 2003 or 1 Oct 2003 to different people!

 * By default, years are numbered according to the Western Dionysian era (also referred to as the Common Era) and the year is assumed to be AD (or CE).
 * This means that in the phrase "Stalin died in 1953 ", it is unnecessary to write either "Stalin died in 1953AD " or "Stalin died in 1953CE ".
 * For years earlier than 1(AD or CE), that year is followed by the two letters BC or the three letters BCE (written in upper case, unspaced, without periods or full stops.

 * To indicate approximately, use the un-italicised abbreviation c. " (followed by a non-breaking space) rather than circa, ca., or approx.
 * Eg: "The temple was built c. 700BC "

especially in listings, but spell out if it looks odd or ambiguous in a particular context. —The preceding comment was added by 118.93nzp (talk • contribs) 23:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * year or years to yr
 * month or months to mo
 * week or weeks to wk
 * hour or hours to h
 * minutes to min

Can we make this less political (or more balanced)?
Phrases like "Germans, with the help of Ukrainian nationalists, killed most of the Jews" seem to me a bit too one-sided. For instance, some Ukrainians (including top nationalists) were helping to save Jews' lives. Should we mention this? I don't think so, because the article would then become too focused on politics. I think that instead we should just make the text more neutral and less emotional. P.S. I should note perhaps that I don't consider myself a nationalist and don't support this ideology. --Yury Bulka (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Please go ahead and add whatever you feel ought to be added. --ϒpsilon (talk) 17:54, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * "Germans, with the help of Ukrainian nationalists, killed most of the Jews" is not one-sided but objectively accurate. However, although the phrase does not state or imply that all Ukrainian nationalists were anti-Semites or pro-Nazi, which would make it one-sided and inaccurate, I can see your point, so let's substitute "collaborators", in place of "nationalists". On the substance, though, Ukrainian collaborators were notorious as major perpetrators of the Holocaust, not only in Ukraine but also as guards at numerous Nazi extermination camps - Treblinka, Sobibor, you name it. If you'd like to mention that some Ukrainians saved Jewish lives, that's also completely fine to state, because it's also true, and it needn't take up a lot of space; even a parenthetical statement such as "(though there were other Ukrainians who risked their lives to save Jews)" would be adequate and fair. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring will not be tolerated
This is a travel guide, not a place for propaganda wars. Until very recently, this city was known as Lvov in English. I think everyone understands why Ukrainians don't like the Russian spelling, but this is an English-language guide and the guiding principle on this site is the traveller comes first - not the Ukrainian nationalist and not the Russian propagandist (added: not the Polish nationalist, either). This article has been semi-protected for now against edit warring by an IP user who has used 3 accounts so far - all currently blocked for 3 days - to do nothing but mess with the place names in this article. When the semi-protection is gone, any attempt to mess with it again will be met with an immediate block. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

 * The facts should be well-known, that Lvov is not a recent English name. Yet you are making statements that contradict reality to travellers in the last decade or so. Perhaps you are doing this in error. I suggest you reexamine your beliefs that Lvov is a current or recent English spelling of Lviv. Where did you get this belief? Why do you hold this belief so strongly? What do you know about Lviv, and how many times have you travelled there?
 * Why did you react so extremely to what could be well-meaning edits? Why are you stereotyping Ukrainians for disliking Russian spelling, that is just not the reality in Ukraine where all people speak Russian? Why have you deleted the more used Polish spelling, when Lviv has long been known as a majority Polish city before WW2? That does injustice to history especially given the forced population transfers and genocide of the Polish that occurred there.
 * How well do you know Ukraine? 37.167.240.102 21:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I've been a geography buff since 1971 and know very well what names were in my atlases. This isn't a belief; it's a fact. And the idea that a decade is a long time - where the hell does that come from? You're talking about a Polish name that isn't likely to have been used much in Lviv for almost 80 years and complaining that we mention what spelling was used in English until a little over a decade ago? Besides, the Polish spelling is included in the article; just look at it. It doesn't matter how much Ukrainian background I have, but my grandmother was born in what I think is now spelled Pidfilipiye (she called it Potfilipye, presumably the Yiddish name) on the then-Austrian side of the River Zbruch. And you don't seem to be here to improve useful travel information for readers, so I don't think we're going to waste a long time in this kind of discussion. Good day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining where your position comes from, old atlases that were from another era. Books are just not used that much these days, and atlases are all but extinct. People have been mainly using online maps for a long long time.
 * When you undid the following edit, "formerly known as Lemberg in German, Lwów in Polish and Lviv in Russian", you also labeled this comment as "vandalism". How is that vandalism? Can we have some higher upper here at Wikivoyage please review this editior?
 * I see that you have recently made multiple undos to this page, and now you are making claims that "edit warring will not be tolerated"? I suggest you follow that principle yourself.
 * You are aggressively pushing your own opinion into an article about a place on the other side of the planet, in a country wher they speak different languages that you may not understand, a country that few English speakers understand correctly, and basing it on old atlases in an era of digital maps.
 * Your background or qualifications are of no concern, this place is impartial and you should be judged by your words and actions.
 * You are making out of place claims of "you don't seem to be here to improve useful travel information for readers". Where is that coming from? I do not see anything to substantiate that in the least.
 * The purpose of Wikivoyage is to help travellers today and in the future. Yet you make claims that we should use Lvov because you think a decade or more ago isn't a long time.
 * The fact is that Lviv was a very Jewish city, but adding the Russian name which was once used in Yiddish as you claim is not the right way to memorialize Jews eliminated by Nazi German horrors. Perhaps it would be appropriate if Jewish people still widely spoke Yiddish, but that language declined quickly. We are supposed to be focusing on what travelers would see and encounter today.
 * People who know Ukraine simply would know that the idea of Lvov being used commonly in Englsh today is just silly.
 * You warring over a strange injection of a Russian name as "English" into an article about Lviv is just misguided and terribly outdated.
 * I also find it strange that you believe that the Polish Lwów is not widely used today. Lviv is close to the Polish border. Many many international travelers arrive from Poland. I think that is another pretty basic thing that anyone who has been to Lviv would probably know.
 * It is also unwilling help to Russia's colonial war of annihalation of the peaceful residents of Ukraine. That is the most puzzling part, I think anyone should be feeling that this is just wrong, because the war is just plain sinister evil. Russian language should be respected and used in the parts of Ukraine where it is relevant. But Lvov is just not used in English today or in recent history. And we should be looking forward, as we are writing for future travelers not for the memorialisation of old atases.
 * I hope you can behave more fairly and revert the changes. 88.167.86.168 23:52, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No-one is saying Lvov is currently the name that's most used in English. I have no interest in continuing this discussion and suggest you stop trying to impute political motives or any other motive than the traveller comes first to other users, but regardless, I'm done here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:17, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 88.167.86.168, I understand why you are angry about Russia's criminal invasion of Ukraine and the death and destruction it is causing, but Wikivoyage is not the place to have those arguments. You are new to Wikivoyage, so you cannot be expected to understand all of our policies. Ikan Kekek is one of our longest-serving contributors, and understands our policies better than most people peopke here. He is also fair-minded, and not here to promote any agenda, least of all the Russian attempt to subjugate Ukraine.
 * You will have to accept that Wikivoyage policies, developed by the Wikivoyage community over the past 19 years or so, support listing other names by which a place has been known in English in recent memory. I am one of those people who knew the city as Lvov, like Kiev and Odessa, until the Ukrainian names were adopted in English. Ground Zero (talk) 00:29, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * [Edit conflict] And the reason why I've concluded you aren't here to help improve a travel guide for travelers is obvious: all you've done is mess with names and complain that other users have nefarious reasons for not accepting your revisions. If you actually have any interest in improving a travel guide, check on whether any listings in cities you know need updating for reasons like price increases or add listings for your favorite restaurants or bars if they're not listed. Over and out. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Also you are wrong that I am angry. You are also most wrong that I am new to Wikivoyage.
 * I understand that you are defending Iran Kekek because you are buddies here, and well the facts do not matter because I am an outsider.
 * You hide behind polices, when the fact is that you are injecting your own biases and ignorance of Ukraine. Saying that Lviv is known as Lvov in English today is silly. Putting in old names in the first sentence is even sillier. We write the guide for the future travelers.
 * You guys need to practice some mental felixibilty. You are defending your errors, because admitting to yourself that you are wrong is mentally difficult. In this case you have also sided with immorality.
 * My advice to you is get to know that places you write about. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:2CD1:829A:2463:97A7 00:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I assure you there are no political motives, the only motives are basic human rights and fairness. I am being as impartial as I possibly can, and actually do not even like Ukraine much myself. I also have a high level of respect for Russian speakers.
 * I am sorry that I had to expose your gross ignorance, and the resultant misbehavior, but that fact is that your actions end up being political and therefore uncalled for. What is your motive?
 * I am just saying that Lvov is not used in English, and has not been for a long time. It is not used today when travelling by English speakers.
 * And that fact that Lvov is there in the first sentence, well that is some kind of attack. And you keep defending this attack, without explanation except to lay bare your ignorance.
 * The best corse of action is to admit you made a mistake, and undo your warring.
 * Also I suggest may an administrator please do a review here. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:2CD1:829A:2463:97A7 00:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Ikan Kekek and I are both administrators. If you wish to contact another administrator, there is a list of them here. I recommend that you check their recent contributions to make sure that you are contacting an admin who has been active recently. Ground Zero (talk) 00:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I did research by Googing "Lvov". Looking at where Lvov is used in recent times in English, I see that Lvov had been used by publications from a certain ethnic group which has been propagandized by Russia over the centuries to hate Ukrainians. I mean no disrespect to them and out of my love for them I will not mention who they are. Basically this ethic group had terrible things done to them, by people of many nationalities including Ukrainians, but false and strong Russian propaganda, over 100 years worth, made the Ukrainians out to be far worse then they were (key to Russia's longtime aim to annihilate Ukrainians). As a result of that they developed anti-Ukrainian sentiment and used the word Lvov in English as a way, I believe, to spite Ukrainians. People, let's please put these battles behind us and not bow to the small portions of our populations that are extremists, especially given that the use of Lvov in English may be linked to sad propaganda, misunderstanding and anti-Ukrainaianism. The relationship between Ukraine and this ethnic group should not be an issue, in fact they should be best buddies. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:2CD1:829A:2463:97A7 10:55, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I have posted this at Requests for comment to solicit input from other contributors as this discussion is not leading to a consensus. Let's see what others have to say. Ground Zero (talk) 11:43, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I've heard Lvov a fair few times, even in recent times (especially those from older generations tend to use it more). Keep the statement in the intro. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:59, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Yes, keep Lvov in the intro. I'm an older Canadian who has never travelled in Eastern Europe & Lvov was the only name I had heard until this year.
 * To my surprise, Lviv wins a Google fight, 38 million hits to 6 million for Lvov. Pashley (talk) 12:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Many older English speakers still use "Lvov" because that was the most common name under the Soviet era, so the name should certainly be included in the intro. This is not a political endorsement of anybody. But yes, it seems that "Lviv" is now the most common English name, so that is what this paged is name, with "Lvov" being a redirect. This is in line with Wikivoyage policy. The dog2 (talk) 14:29, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the amazing help. You have gone above and beyond!
 * I was unaware that Lvov was used by older people from North America. These will be people who most likely never have been to Lviv in this millenium, otherwise they would surely know Lviv and probably use it. I have visited Lviv over a dozen times, the first time right after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is true that long ago Lvov was used in English. I was unaware that there are still apparently people that did not realize the English name change, or its political correctness pretty much everywhere in the world outside of the Russian speaking world.
 * And just a final note, Lviv is different that Kyiv etc, it's a different part of Europe with a different history. Certainly Kiev etc should be included in their articles. But Lvov, well let's hope that in a few short years the consensus shifts with the passing of time to remove Lvov from English use here due to lack of knowledge of that term. 2A01:E0A:9D5:AA20:2CD1:829A:2463:97A7 18:29, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lviv


text:
Talk:Lynchburg

Major cleanup work
Just added to my to-do list an overhaul of this page. When I say this, I mean formatting restaurants to fit template format, removing closed locations, adding some new Dos. Look like most of the edits ignore some other development on the Liberty campus (open-to-the-public ice rink?), some restaurant openings, etc.(WT-en) Jpatch 10:50, 17 March 2011 (EDT)
 * This cleanup work has been completed.(WT-en) Jpatch 10:38, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Lynchburg


text:
Talk:Lynchburg (Tennessee)

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

Comments
You can buy bottles of whiskey at the end of the distillery tour. Our guide told us that a vote was held and they got legislative permission to sell bottles there. I think that should be noted here, but it did not seem like you could just walk in and buy a bottle, you had to take the tour.

title: Talk:Lynchburg (Tennessee)


text:
Talk:Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park

Nice to see interest in this park, but might it be better as an attraction under Johnson City (Texas)? Unless I'm missing something, it's a day-use park only and you can't sleep there, which probably disqualifies it as a destination. Our policy on United States National Parks is somewhat inconsistently applied, so I could be argued out of this, but a merge and redirect looks best to me. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:23, 21 June 2008 (EDT)

 * I'd support a redirect to Johnson City... this seems like it's more of a museum, even though it's called a nat'l park... really doesn't seem like it needs its own article – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 19:52, 21 June 2008 (EDT)

 * Yeah, the national historic sites are rarely, in my experience, comparable to the National Parks, or even National Monuments. They're usually small museums. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:22, 21 June 2008 (EDT)


text:
Talk:Lyngby

Some of the lake stuff might go to Bagsværd and other destinations --(WT-en) elgaard 20:28, 25 September 2006 (EDT)

Nice work!
Nice work so far, It looks like a beautiful little human development. It looks tight-nit. Keep smiling ,(WT-en) ee talk 14:02, 5 November 2008 (EST).

title: Talk:Lyngby


text:
Talk:Lyon

In the French version:

"Les restaurants typiquement lyonnais s'appellent les bouchons."

Are they stubs or corks? -(WT-en) phma 17:57, 16 Mar 2004 (EST)

 * In English we call them bouchons. Of course you can point out that that usually means "cork".  ;) -- (WT-en) Mark 00:57, 17 Mar 2004 (EST)

Translation
Per the conversation on automatc translation, here is a handy link to the Babelfish of the French version -- the DotM for that site in Jan, so there is a ton of good info...

 * Lyon

Note: do not edit the babelfished site by mistake!

Get around
I had written that bikes could only be rented with a FRENCH Debit/credit card. This has been changed to "European" some months ago by a not authenticated user who I cannot contact now. Has anything changed on this issue in the meantime? Because I tried with all my European debit/credit cards in May with no success and then I asked the Tourist Information office in the City which confirmed that you can only use French cards. Any knowledgeable confirmation/revision to this? This is very important in order not to have people coming to Lyon with too high hopes in getting a bike with this system.

 * My Visa Electron debit card issued in the Czech republic worked without any problem. -(WT-en) Jkt 16:26, 5 December 2009 (EST)

I used my Barclay's Visa debit card (issued from the UK) earlier this month (July 2010). I ran into some disappointed American students who were unable to use their cards but as noted and explained in further detail on my blog, it's because their cards didn't have chips: http://katrichterwrites.wordpress.com/page/6/

Districting
I would like to nominate this article for DotM, but it was previously nominated and was slushed. One of the objections was that there are no district articles, and that if it's decided that there shouldn't be, the "Districts" section should be deleted (I don't agree with that objection). So what do you think? Is this city big enough to merit districtification? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't particularly like either banner, but I think the existing one is somewhat clearer. Texugo (talk) 02:50, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I much prefer the current banner, which features a nice historic landmark, whereas the new banner is mostly just a wash of light, with only the one tower really noticeable as a clear structure. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree with Texugo. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:01, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Current banner Matroc (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * What about this one? It is hard to put in one picture the spirit of a city. For Lyon (I visited, not lived there), I would think about either the view from the hill, the old town (looks italian), the traditional restaurants, the river, the park. Unfortunately I don't have good photos that could fit well with the format of a banner for most of them - Fabimaru (talk) 17:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That photo is weirdly slanted, which I don't like. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I (partially) removed the distorsion coming from the lens. (I love ultra-wide lenses :-) ) - Fabimaru (talk) 18:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, that's a lot better! I also think that version of the banner is better than the current one. It's a clearer image and feels more alive than the current one, too. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If there are other positive feedback, I will upload it to Commons. And if a more satisfying photo is proposed, that would be event better. - Fabimaru (talk) 19:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I've changed the banner to Fabimaru's for the moment. If another one is suggested, we can discuss it here. --Nick talk 23:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

2019
We have got two more banners from Wiki Loves Monuments. I like #184, because the church it depicts is more recognizable than the Lyon cathedral on the current "Fabimaru's" banner. --Alexander (talk) 13:17, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I never knew you could see the Eiffel Tower from Lyon ;) I will look at these and the other changes you've proposed later on when I have access to a desktop.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:33, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I still prefer the current banner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

 * The current one has its faults, but #183 is a skyline without the skyline (I do recognise it as Lyon, though) and #184 is cropped a bit oddly.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:17, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, it's worth trying out the proposals in situ. I like the look of both of them more in full-size, though still prefer Fabimaru's. #183 might be a good replacement for Greater Lyon's current one.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, salut, anything to add? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:36, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the current banner looks good and does a good job of representing nice architecture. Can we keep that one? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 22:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry for the very late reply, I did not contribute to Wikivoyage from quite some time. I find it tough to represent a city in one banner, and I'm not very knowledgeable about Lyon. I don't like #183 because it does not show anything that makes me want to visit it, and I could not say it makes Lyon unique. My banner shows the old city, and I'm attracted by old centers because I find modern building nondescript. Well, if someone asked me where it is, I could not answer. What I don't like about #184 is that it does not look like a city, but I reminds me that it was nice visiting this place. Tough choice - Fabimaru (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Further improvements to this article
This is a pretty meaty article that would be a good Dotm candidate with a little work. Here are things that I see that need further work:

First, we should consider the objections made at Destination of the month candidates/Slush pile, which are still relevant. For the record, the "Districts" subsection of "Understand" does not bother me, and I find it pretty instructive. However, there should be at least one map that shows points of interest acceptably, whether it's a static or dynamic map, or even a series of different maps, if necessary.

In the "Go next" section, having a full listing for a museum is irregular. If Rochetaillée-sur-Saône is pretty close to Lyon, this listing could be moved to "See," perhaps in a separate sub-section called "Out of town" or something, with more directions given.

The mere name "The bird park of Villars-les-Dombes" is not really helpful either, because without directions or a link, how does the reader know how to get there?

The text box, "Go skiing from Lyon" has three footnote-style links. Since these ski tours depart from Lyon, I think they should be put into a subsection in the "Do" section and given full listings after the introductory information. I'd argue that a ski tour constitutes value added, since skiing is an activity, and these sound like good deals for the skier.

In "Connect," the information on phone numbers is useful but is really relevant to the entire country, beyond the regional code itself. So I'd argue that part is inessential, and that readers can simply be referred to France. However, the information is really well presented, so it certainly wouldn't bother me if it were kept in the article.

Is there anything else you notice that would need work before this article would be ready to be nominated for a Dotm slot? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Map of Lyon tourist attractions & transportation
I made this map of Lyon that may be of use to some people: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xIPfMs__mPuiGE7BGcfSwKPxoUQ&usp=sharing

It includes just about everything from this article as of summer 2017. I mostly work on Wikipedia, and am not sure if this would be appropriate to add to the article, so I thought I'd just leave it here.

Rystheguy (talk) 15:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Welcome aboard WV! Maybe you should like to check this out. Best wishes! Ibaman (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! Rystheguy (talk) 19:19, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lyon


text:
Talk:M'Hamid

Hotel Sahara
> There is also the legendary and very friendly Hotal Sahara run by the Naamani brothers, Habib and Hassan.

What makes it more legendary than any other hotel in MHamid? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 10:42, 19 November 2006 (EST)

 * In the meanwhile, I removed Legendary from the article--but still I'd be happy if you tell what makes it legendary. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 18:42, 26 January 2007 (EST)

 * Will you stop nitpicking other people's descriptions if you have no personal experience of the place? The single word "legendary" usually means that the place is well-known in the backpacker community, and is a pretty good guarantee that it's decent.  If you remove it, and just call it "friendly", this is lost. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:42, 26 January 2007 (EST)

 * Isn't Wikivoyage all about open discussion and consensus? What's wrong about asking a question that (in my belief) can clarify a listing? It was not obvious for me that legendary means exactly that (and it furthermore refers to backpacker community--how a reader is supposed to guess about that?)
 * I left a question 2 months ago, both here and on user's talk page. In 2 months, I get no answer. After getting no answer, I removed that piece from the article--following Maj's recommendation on dubious content:
 * if you doubt something, pull it out to the talk page.
 * Legendary has nothing to do with personal experience with a place per se--it's only about reputation, about place being famous etc. Do you mean that I should not try to improve any other's text? Otherwise, how would you recommend to resolve cases like this? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 04:20, 27 January 2007 (EST)

 * If you have reason to doubt the description, then go ahead and pull it out — but what is your reason to doubt that the gulyas in Rab Raby is worth trying, or that the Hotel Sahara is not well known in M'Hamid? (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:45, 27 January 2007 (EST)

 * I've been in MHamid and participated in finding accommodation for our travel--but heard nothing legendary-like about Sahara. OK, it may be popular with backpackers (which sounds much clearer), or even legendary well-known among back-packers.
 * In general, I believe we should avoid characteristics like Legendary if we give no reasoning or details--it will help a reader understand what exactly is meant (again, legendary can have too much readings), and it helps to distinguish tout-style listings from real experience-based.
 * As for Rab Ráby, I already gave my reasons for asking:
 * gulyas is probably the most typical and frequently served dish in Hungary--so recommending gulyas at a particular restaurant should have a strong reason
 * You answered a question, I updated the article and now it's bit more clear. But what's wrong about it? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 05:18, 27 January 2007 (EST)
 * In a nutshell, I am trying to make these two pieces more helpful for a traveller choosing a place to eat in Szentendre or a place to stay in MHamid. I believe that changes I make and discussions I initiate move us a bit in this direction. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 07:56, 27 January 2007 (EST)
 * Let me see how I can best express this. I went to Rab Raby in Szentendre, ate the gulyas and thought it was good enough to record in Wikivoyage when I created the article a few years later.  And when you went and removed this recommendation without what I would consider good reason (eg. ordering the gulyas yourself and finding that it's full of cockroaches), I was somewhat offended.
 * A fundamental Wiki principle is Assume Good Faith: if somebody adds information ("Try the gulyas"), the default assumption is that it's a valid recommendation (= the goulash is good).  I see no reason for you to assume that this is "dubious", and it's certainly not the kind of important info that warrants pulling out until "verification" (by who, the Central Goulash Committee?). (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:17, 28 January 2007 (EST)
 * Ever heard of the Ketchup Advisory Board? I know, that comment is off-topic. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 16:00, 28 January 2007 (EST)

 * First of all, I never deleted the "Try the gulyas" phrase, not I marked it for verification--I only asked a question on details of this on a talk page. I don't see any bad in asking for clarifications.
 * Second, I acted from a typical traveller's point of view. I already spent several days in Hungary when I read the Szentendre article, and this phrase gave me no added information. It looked like this was the first (and the only) Hungarian restaurant author visited, and yes, he liked gulyas there. But it's like writing "try pasta" for a restaurant in Italy, or "try tajine" for a cafe in Morocco, or "try sushi" for a sushi bar in Japan.
 * This is why the following update sounds much better, and in my opinion it's much more helpful and useful compared to original version: "Gulyas soup is what the restaurant is most famous for, and it's served in a funky manner". Would you mind if we update Rab Raby with this edition? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 14:59, 28 January 2007 (EST)

 * As for Hotel Sahara: can we be certain that "well-known among back-packers" is true, I mean it is really well-known and it's really most popular among back-packers? I'm still willing to improve the vague Legendary--but I want to be sure the improved version is still true. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:03, 28 January 2007 (EST)

 * Ping ;-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:01, 29 January 2007 (EST)

(WT-en) Jpatokal, did you revert the whole set of my changes intentionally for some reason, or it was merely an attempt to undelete the Legendary word (which was affected only in my last edit)? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:27, 27 January 2007 (EST)

 * My mistake, I only meant to revert the last edit. Apologies. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:17, 28 January 2007 (EST)

Questions
I do not know the area, so I'm reluctant to do major edits. Asking here instead.

Dar Sidi Bonou is listed under Do/trips, under Eat, and under Sleep. I think it should only be listed once, under Sleep, with mention of the other services.

Normal policy is not to list booking agents, only actual tour providers. Should "Sahara Services" and perhaps others be removed because of that policy? Also, "Sahara Best Travel" is based in Marrakesh so I'd say list it only there. (WT-en) Pashley 00:09, 28 September 2009 (EDT)

 * Sidi Bonou: support.
 * Sahara Services: originally it had "Chiri Biri" as an sub-item; I will find a way to fix it. But as long as we don't have contacts for the latter, I don't think we'll add value by removing Sahara Services (which is listed in LP, btw). --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:59, 29 September 2009 (EDT)

Tour listing criteria in this article
There is an entire category of "Camel trips and 4x4" in this article, so on what basis would listings be deleted under the Wikivoyage tour policy, rather than for violating policies like "Don't tout" or putting up incomplete listings w/o rates, etc.? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:11, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

 * I gave a wrong link in edit summary. Please read Tour instead. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:33, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

 * I think that still could use some clarification, in an article with many tour listings, indeed. What criteria do you think we should use in judging the appropriateness or inappropriateness of tour listings in this article? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:19, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

 * The article currently seems to be presenting a heavy bias toward the listing of Camel trips and 4x4 providers, and to a lesser extent; 'Quad bikes and buggies". If possible it would be good if we could determine if this really is the overwhelmingly dominant touristic endeavour or offering of this destinatioon, or if the article has just been hijacked by this focus and has become a venue for the promotion of camel and 4x4 trips. A little like say jetski operators or surf board hire operators dominating a destination article whilst it is in reality just one of many things to do at a beach. Reading a few blogs and travel reviews on the location it seems that the article hijack speculation may have some context. When reading some of the promotional blurb of local accom providers and some TA reviews it does appear the area has other things going for it and it is not solely a desert trek departure point as seems to be projected in the article. http://www.moxon.net/morocco/draa_valley.html gives a blow through account of the town. When looking at the information provided by tour operators it appears that the better 'dunes' are a 2-3 day trip away, therefore somewhat supporting the desert gateway theme that is projected. As I have not seen it with my own eyes it is hard to tell if people just travel 2-3 days to see someone elses dunes. I have travelled a lot in deserts composed of sand dunes and though there is some subtle variety a large mountain of sand in one place tends to look much the same as in another unless there is something very different sitting right next to it. It seems the place is more symbolic as where the asphalt road ends. It does appear that the destination offers access to a desert dune environment that requires a 4x4 vehicle and some desert navigational experience. The location apparently has some quite enthusiastic touts that underline this to any traveller that ventures there. If so then maybe this qualifies the operators in the context of 'something a traveler cannot normally do on their own'. I have set off into several deserts on my own or in company with others. I needed no guide, then again I have a lot of experience in deserts and would not recommend that to others unless they had the same sort of knowledge. The average traveller does not.  In regard to criteria for listing an operator I would think that at a minimum they must have a local base of operations, provide vehicles, and provide tour support staff, a guide and support equipment. If they are booking or 'packaging' then they will be self disqualifying under the normal guidelines. I offer the following review of the existing listings for consideration. -- (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)
 * I have since done an article wide clean-up and reviewed such things as general formatting and applied some mild copy edits, the tour providers remain essentially as before, as this is being discussed here, but they had a minor tidy up. If any are to be removed I think Safari, as they are an obvious re-seller and remain the most obvious to be deleted. -- (WT-en) felix 12:36, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  Cynab Voyages is a family-owned Moroccan-American tour operator based in Marrakech with over 20 years of experience. The company uses only local guides with a love for their country and a knack for making travelers feel at home. Every guide speaks Arabic, Amazigh, French, and English. While offering standard packages, itineraries are often tailored to travellers’ particular interests.
 * Comments: based in Marrakech no local address provided.
 * Remove, should list in Marrakech unless they have a local base or office, however are we assisting the article by removing it?. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  A friendly and family-run desert travel business providing work for local people. Offers many different types of desert tours according to budget and client requirements/capabilities from 4x4 excursions, walking tours, camel treks, bivouac camps and sandboarding - short and long duration. Excellent knowledge of local area and with office in Ouarzazate for arranging other Moroccan itineraries.
 * Comments: apparently based in M'Hamid, but sounds like they might be a travel service offering a booking service, however as indistinct maybe it should be assumed they are offering treks and tours.
 * Retain. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * A small family company offering tours and excursions both by 4x4 and camel through Southern Morocco and the desert. The prices include all meals, overnight stays, guide, transport and all visits.
 * Comments, sounds like might be a genuine local provider of tours. However there are no contact details, location unknown.
 * Remove unless contact details are provided and location determined, maybe they are quite apparent in the town. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * Two very friendly guides offering camel treks and 4x4 Tours.
 * Comments: apparently based in M'Hamid. They self describe as "guides" but it is clarified they are providing "treks and tours".
 * Retain, but consider if it should be moved to the Zagora article, that town is back up the road toward Marrakech. Their website describes tours "departing from M'Hamid". (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  A small kasbah owned and operated by a Canadian Artist Nancy with her Berber husband Daoud. Where people can spend a night and trek to the desert in overnight trips both by camel and 4x4.
 * Comments: URL provided, no address no tel number. Apparently situated 4 km before M'Haamid at Dar sidi Bounou. Their website describes them as an accom provider "A traditional daub house in a palmerie garden near the Saharan dunes at Bounou". They have an 'Activities' section on their website, it describes local cultural activities, yoga and offers"exotic Berber Style Marriage Celebrations" amongst other things, maybe they are listed in the wrong section. They had three listings in the article, on in Sleep, one in Eat and the other in this tours sub-section.
 * Removed to Sleep on 22 dec 2011. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  A customer-end intermediary for desert trips (both camel and 4x4) that is well connected with most of the local providers (and individual guides/car-owners?), but also seem to receive a huge part of price you pay. Don't confuse with many outlets in MHamid that also have a Sahara Services sign--use as a reference or just call them.
 * Comments: apparently based in M'Hamid. Offering "customer-end intermediary" services, this appears to be twisted language describing a 'booking service or packager'.
 * Remove, it is also apparent from detail in other listings that Safari Services contract their tours to the actual tour providers, therefore they are a 'booking' service or re-seller. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  A small but friendly travel service who can arrange guided, personalised tours of the whole of Morocco but specialize in the Saharan region. Small group tours staying and eating in local private houses a possibility.
 * Comments: "apparently a tour booking service based in M'Hamid.
 * Remove unless clear they are offering actual trip services, however are we assisting the article by such a removal?. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 *  contact Razgui Mohamed. One of operators that does perform the trips for Chiri Biri and Sahara Services intermediaries. Operates 2-, 5- and 7-day tours.
 * Comments: possibly based in M'Hamid, but lacking an address, described as though they are a freelance or contract guide. It sounds like this is an actual operator offering both 'contact' services and also independent direct to customer services, and is possibly locally based.
 *  Retain. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * <do name="Driss Aventures" phone="+212 672 48-16-60">A very experienced licensed Moroccan guide with a great sense of humour from M'Hamid with an agency in Ouarzazate. Tailor-made trips for one or several days, trekking with camels or stays in bivouacs. Combination of trips to desert with other sights on the road to the desert, including exquisite cuisine and possibility to experience home visits for food & tea time. Contact Driss Himoud</do>
 * Comments: apparently based in M'Hamid, but described as though they are a freelance or contract guide. It sounds like this is an actual operator offering both 'contact' services and also independent direct to customer services, and is locally based.
 * Retain. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * <do name="Mhamidtravel" email="mhamidtravel@yahoo.fr" phone="+212 668 16-79-18"> Experience biovacing in the ancient sand dunes of Chgaga, camel trip to the back desert of Hmada and Dravali, see the history of this area with your own senses, meet the friendly Bedouin and learn their customs. Find all of these experiences plus the knowledge of the Tuareg, Mohammed Sbai as your experienced guide.</do>
 * Comments: apparently based in M'Hamid, but described as though they are a freelance or contract guide. It sounds like this is an independent guide, possibly self -disqualifying, however as indistinct maybe it should be assumed they are offering treks and tours.
 * Retain. (WT-en) felix 07:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * I really appreciate your remarks, Felix, and I agree with most of them. One question I'd have, though, is if we move Cynar's listing to Marrakech, and they're based there but do trekking in the M'Hamid area, is Marrakech really the best place to list them? Then again, that's not our problem; the provider, who originally listed in numerous articles about desert towns in Morocco, should make their own arguments, within the limits of Wikivoyage guidelines. I'd also say that I doubt we'd harm this article by removing the entries you point to, since there are so many entries in this guide. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 22:34, 21 December 2011 (EST)
 * Totally agree with your comments on Cynar's listing. If Cynar are of some value to the M'Hamid article then better to list there as a listing in Marrakech may be of limited value to the Marrakech article and a bit to lost to be of use to travellers to M'Hamid. Then again maybe it is a service to visitors to Marrakech letting them know of someone there they can go and see about a trip to M'Hamid. I think you are right in the suggestion that it may be best to just follow policy and let Cynar make their case, if they are active here. -- cheers-- (WT-en) felix 05:00, 22 December 2011 (EST)
 * Based on Cynab's current description, which never mentions M'Hamid, I have removed their listing. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:08, 2 June 2012 (EDT)

Help patrolling Morocco for tour agency spam and deleting tour listings that don't belong

 * Swept in from the pub.

I'd still like help with the Pedasi listing, but I hope some of you can help with this larger problem. There's a new spammer, who says they are a "legitimate and licensed organization offering desert tours to Zagora" but is posting all over the place, with no street address but "based in Marrakech." I thought I had posted to 41.250.186.13's Talk page, but I see no evidence of that (I must have closed the tab before hitting "Enter") and have to get some sleep. Here are the anonymous user's [|contributions]. I've been deleting them all, but I'm unsure what to do in the M'Hamid guide, because there are so many tours listed. What standard do we want to use? Local addresses only? Thanks in advance for helping. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 06:54, 19 December 2011 (EST)

 * I removed them again. Local addresses only is the starting point, I think.  --(WT-en) Inas 22:34, 20 December 2011 (EST)

 * Thank you, Inas. The thing is, for some desert locations, we have been allowing non-touty trekking operators, provided that they have an office in the town in question. I was going to provide [|this] as a good example, but I see that not a single listing has a street address listed. But then again, I don't know if there are street addresses in Wadi Rum. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:58, 21 December 2011 (EST)

 * Yeah - it is going to be a judgement call in a place like this, and we probably aren't going to get it exactly right. However a couple were clearly travel agents with no guiding capacity, and I think that is still preferable to list operators when we can.  --(WT-en) Inas 06:48, 21 December 2011 (EST)

title: Talk:M'Hamid


text:
Talk:Maastricht

Some External Links that were left by a visitor, may be expanded by someone and added to the article.

(WT-en) Xltel 13:53, 22 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * http://www.maastrichtnet.nl - For all cultural events
 * http://www.maastricht.nl
 * http://www.vvvmaastricht.nl/ - The local tourist agency, the VVV
 * http://www.wikimaas.org - Maastricht Independent City Guide - This is an elaborative wiki with all the information you won't find at the regular tourist information sites and guides. (Wikimaas' registration seems to have expired. (WT-en) Manumitany 20:44, 11 March 2012 (EDT))

Regarding the Hotel Mabi, I think the comment is unfair. I stayed at the Mabi for four nights a week for 3 months while working on a contract. The staff were pleasant and helpful. The rooms were uninspiring but clean and pleasant and occasionally you might be lucky and get one of their special rooms which were themed and larger. The movie theme of the hotel was a bit much but it was quirky. I stayed at lots of other hotels in Maastricht and Mabi was by no means the worst; in fact I would put it in the top 1/3. martin _AT ciderpunk DOT_ com

Carnival
Someone should take the task of writing about the Maastricht carnival. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 212.242.219.124 (talk • contribs)

Taxi & minibus transfers from Brussels Airport
Is http://www.maastrichttransfer.com the only company providing those? If not, it shouldn't be linked to "available" in the following sentence:

"Private taxi and minibus transfers are available."

That's touting. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Maastricht


text:
Talk:Macau

Picture
Today's picture of the day on Commons is from Macau. I'd like to see it used in one of our articles, but I'm not sure where it might go so I'm putting it here instead. Pashley (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I haven't seen that before. I'm sure to check it out next time in Macau! Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Today's picture-of-the-day is also from Macau. It looks as though there are many new Macau photos on Commons, some excellent. Pashley (talk) 12:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Next to the current banner, the new proposal looks like just another dry and boring skyline shot. Texugo (talk) 02:38, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think the current banner is much more striking and interesting to look at. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I try and avoid cityscapes when possible. The proposal looks like any generic developed city in Asia or even maybe South America. The current banner gives a sense of excitement of actually visiting this place. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Much prefer the existing banner. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Current banner Matroc (talk) 03:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Statistics of revenue
I deleted this text because I really could see no value in it. Perhaps this kind of thing is good for Wikipedia but not WV. Also the WV list linked to is completely irrelevant to these rankings, since that is about population size, not tourist revenue. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

"A UN World Tourism Organisation list of the top ten destinations in the world by tourism industry revenue treats Macau, Hong Kong and China as separate destinations. Macau ranks ninth on the list while Hong Kong is tenth and China itself is not among the top ten. For the full list, see World cities/Large."

 * I added it originally, so obviously I do see some value, but I'm not passionately attached to the idea of keeping it. The WV list linked to gives population, top ten tourist destinations by number of visitors (Macau not in that list) and by revenue (Macau 9th).
 * Anyone else want to comment? Pashley (talk) 14:19, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Currency symbol?
I'd like to promote this to guide — possible now that all districts are at least usable — and nominate it for DotM, so I've been doing some copy edits. I'd encourage others to have a look as well.

An issue I notice, but am not sure how to fix, is that currency symbols are not consistent. We have things like $12 and 120MOP, maybe others. Can we agree on one & apply it consistently? I feel rather strongly that $ is wrong (does it mean pataca, HK $, or even US $?), but I might be wrong. Pashley (talk) 00:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

 * MOP ( Macanese_pataca ) should be the standard currency. Slightly complicated because Hong Kong dollars are near universally accepted in Macau.
 * MOP 1 is very nearly equivalent with HKD $1, so there isn't any reason to list HKD prices.
 * $ should never refer to United States dollars. If it does then we need 'USD' beforehand to make it clear. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:08, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Why not? Macau should be featured on the Main Page between Oct and Feb, the driest period of the year. As of now we have candidates until October, so now it's probably the time to fix stuff, upgrade the status to guide and nominate the article.
 * Concerning the currency notations, it's best to write "MOP", "HKD" or "USD" to make sure readers don't get wrong information. The article could also use a couple more lively photos, but otherwise I see no major problems with it. The districts look decent, but could definitely benefit from coordinates and a couple more listings (especially Eat listings). ϒpsilon (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Pashley and Andrew, what do you think? I'm not familiar with Macao but I think you are? ϒpsilon (talk) 12:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Well, I've been there a few times :) What is the actual question right now? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Same here, though not in about 5 years.
 * This article and the districts need a consistent currency symbol. Should we be writing $100, MOP100, MOP 100, 100 MOP? I do not think there are other credible candidates?. Pashley (talk) 04:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 * The Pataca is the official currency, even though US, HKD and Chinese RMB are used widely as well (Many businesses accept HKD notes on a 1:1 basis for payment). For consistency the format "MOP 1,477" should be used. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 * As we're about to promote the article to Guide, the questions are whether there's anything important missing and how currencies should be denoted. MOP100 is what our policy says, I think. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 * I've promoted to Guide status and will nominate it sometime later. The best time to feature it is some Northern Hemisphere winter month, I guess. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

 * There still seems to be an inconsistency in currency symbols. Macau includes the text "Prices are shown as $10, for example (10 patacas)." and the $ sign is indeed used in places, but MOP is used elsewhere.

 * This should be fixed before the article is featured, and it is scheduled for November. Pashley (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article Macanese pataca says that "The abbreviation MOP$ is commonly used." So let's use that. Ground Zero (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Star ratings?
Star ratings are easily abused by marketers, and this article uses them a lot which raises a red flag for skeptical me. The main page has:
 * Hotel listings are in the individual district pages. Budget accommodation is one that carries a 2-star rating or below, a mid-range place has a 3-star rating, and a splurge place has a 4-star rating or above.

Several of the district articles have "n-star" labels as subheadings and Coloane describes one place as "Family 4-star hotel that actually feels more like a 3-star hotel." The Cotai article describes both the Hyatt and Four Seasons as 5-star; I think of both as 4-star chains.

Macau/Peninsula lists 8 places as 5-star; compare to this quote from Rating systems:
 * The Mobil Travel Guide (now the Forbes Guide) awarded five stars in 2006 to 32 hotels in all of North America (US, Canada & Mexico); more recent editions award "five stars" to just a handful of US hotels (10 in CA, 7 in NY, 2 each in HI and IL, 1 each in TX and DC, many states zero).

Yes, Macau has a lot of high-end hotels, but does one district really have more 5-star places than New York State?

At the very least, we need a precise statement of what definition we are using for these ratings. Is there an official definition, perhaps the local tourism department? Absent that, all references to them should be removed. Pashley (talk) 13:21, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Either clearly define what precisely is meant by star ratings or get rid of them. If there is a clear progression by price, we should use that instead imho. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

 * It has been some months since the above discussion & nobody has pointed to a definition. The article is due to be DotM in November, so I'm removing references to stars now. Pashley (talk) 05:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hong Kong workers?
We have:
 * Non-residents who wish to take up employment in Macau, including those from Portugal or mainland China, ...

What about people from Hong Kong? Or Taiwan? They both get special treatment on the mainland. Pashley (talk) 16:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

SEO
I just had a look at where this page ranks compared to its inferior copy, and I am saddened to say that it's Search Engine Ranking could be better. Searching for just the word "Macau" using startpage.com that other site is the first hit below Lonely Planet and Wikipedia, whereas our guide (soon to be featured) does not even show up on all the pages casual observers are likely to look at. This might be due to the fact that copyscape says our article has "11,729 words, 37% matched" and overall "4,341 matching words were found", which to me is both substantial and too much. It may not preclude featuring, but surely those things are - in addition to dead weblinks and the like - the first thing to be targeted when polishing the page. Or am I mistaken there? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:34, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

HKD
The quickbar says that the Hong Kong dollar is also used in Macau. Is this true? I've never been to Macau, so don't know (I presume or  would know on whether HKD is accepted). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:15, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

 * While I used MOP for my previous trips to Macau, it seems that HKD circulate widely among Macau: a casino stated that Hong Kong Dollar is widely used by Macau vendors, casinos accept HKD to buy casino chips, and other sources from Google search also indicate that Hong Kong dollar is widely accepted, but exchange may be given in MOP.廣九直通車 (talk) 12:28, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

 * HKD was widely accepted in Macau when I went there. Even the greyhound racing track accepted bets and did payouts in both HKD and MOP. The dog2 (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Never thought that'd be the case. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:24, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Macau