Some, in fact most, of the bar descriptions read like they were written by the bar's advertising firms. Double exclamation marks and "this is the place to be seen!!" style utterances appear everywhere. I have tried to bring a few of the more outrageous ones back down to reality, but considerably more work needs to be done in this area. -- 188.8.131.52 12:04, 23 January 2007 (EST)
Exactly, the kingsd head is given a glowing review here. Although it is a great pub, the beer and the craic are good -the food is shite. Seriously, its reheated burgers and ovenchips. This section needs intensive re-working (unbiased of course...)
I totally agree that the bar descriptions are minimally informative and read like small ads. They make the article very long and detract from its usefulness. Also the spelling 'craic' is wrong - should be 'crack' if the word has to be used (see wiki article on 'craic'). Cooke 17:12, 28 June 2007 (EDT)
The following is a discussion/debate about the inclusion of images "Ice statue in grounds of Belfast City Hall" and
"Prairie dogs in Belfast Zoo", but it should be noted that this was a very old discussion when these were the only two images present on the page. We now have a better mix of more photos. We also have some text mentioning prairie dogs, so we might (I suppose) want to reconsider including these images -- Harry Wood 12:23, 23 January 2007 (EST)
(old 2004 discussion)
I'm removing the photos. They are not adding anything to the article. It's about Belfast, and not about praerie dogs or ice statues. -- Nils 07:05, 13 Apr 2004 (EDT)
Again, I remvoed the images. Please read the Wikitravel:Image policy. a) If people are not interesting to an article about a place, then neither are ice statues. b) Praery dogs in some zoo are the same all over the world. If you want dogs, go to an animal website. I stand by my claim that these photos add nothing at all to the article, and waste bandwidth. Now, if you had any photos of Belfast landmarks, by all means, please upload a representative picture and add it to the article. -- Nils 01:11, 14 Apr 2004 (EDT)
Firstly, you undid my changes twice without mentioning it in the talk pages, so I believe you are in no position to demand I do the same. On the matter of the pictures;
Every couple of years or so in Belfast ice statues are created in the grounds of the Belfast City Hall. That is what the first picture shows, the ice statue with the grounds of the city hall, Belfast's biggest tourist attraction, in the background. The photograph in question was displayed in Belfast Central Library in a recent exhibition about Belfast.
The second photo depicts the 'free' prairie dogs, which run wild throughout the park and are a well known Belfast landmark.
The photos combined come in at a size of 20k, well under the guidelines under the Wikitravel:Image_policy. Being quite well qualified to talk about Belfast, it is my opinion that they do add to the article. They show landmarks and are very small.
Lastly, your tone over this matter has been highly insulting and patronising. I have contributed quite a few articles to wikitravel, and deserve more respect than to be admonished several times for not neven breaking any rules. By acting first and then telling me off, you are being very arrogant. On your page, you state that a travel guide needs pictures. I fully intend to add them back in. In the meantime, learn some manners.
1) I did mention the removal on the talk page. I did this despite it not being wiki custom, exactly so you had a chance to reply. Instead it was you who re-added the changes. Obviously, there is disagreement; you are the one who chose not to discuss them.
2) My tone is short and to the point whenever I can manage. If I have used any degoratary words or insults, you are welcome to point them out to me.
3) I stand by my comment that pictures of ice statues and little dogs add nothing to the Belfast article. Note that your article talks neither about ice statues, nor about praerie dogs. I now even used search function for "ice" and "dogs" to make sure I didn't miss either. With such an explanation, the situation does change slightly. I still argue that both pictures do not give you a good (as in "comprehensive") impression of the city and hence are a less than perfect choice for the article.
4) Wikipedia image policy is to use a "minimal number" of images. The "minimum" is obviously zero. If a picture adds no value to an article, then it could be argued that use of this image is against the "minimum" policy. Any inappropriate picture, no matter the size, is a waste of bandwidth. This just to clarify my point on this matter.
5) I edit articles. If I were to discuss every minor change with everybody else beforehand, we'd never get anything done. Discussion should be done in case of disagreement, not before, unless it is obvious beforehand that something will become a point of disagreement. Instead of re-adding the images without any feedback, you should have pointed out your point of view. Just because you happen to live in Belfast does not mean you are the final authority over this article, any more than I am. As Evan says, "there is no I in Wiki". See also Point 1), above.
That done, I would like you to consider if these pictures are really representative of Belfast. Imagine this: You have, say, two images to describe your city. You want people to have a good impression, but to also know what it really looks like. What city scenes would you use to depict Belfast? Is the ice statue event so big that it's a primary tourist draw? What does a typical "interesting" tourist area look like? Architecture? Specific landmarks, like churches, highrises, temples, whatnot?
Even if you can convince me that the city market square with the ice statue is a good representative photo of Belfast - which you haven't yet - I would still contest the animal photo. Are praerie dogs so rare that they only occur in Belfast? Are they such a big draw that people come from all over to see them? Are they what make Belfast, well, "Belfast"? - You get the idea...
I added a Gay & Lesbian section, but it was removed with no reason given. I added a similar G&L section to the Cork and Dublin Wikitravels and they were not removed. It explains alot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
Of course there should be a Gay and Lesbian section to the main page it makes sense that it should be grouped under every other of the city's attractions, thus I readded it Tartimarty 20:39, 7 August 2007 (EDT)
Umm I read somewhere in the article that it's common courtesy for British tourists to visit the Sinn Fein shop..? Is this serious..? Why would they want to be visiting Sinn Fein shops for..?
extra pic of city hall? --Lone.guner 12:45, 30 January 2008 (EST) not working? --Lone.guner 12:45, 30 January 2008 (EST)
:-) I like this misreading. The article actually says 'common curiosity', but I love the notion conjured up by 'common courtesy' - English folk feeling it's only polite to tiptoe in and buy some provo memorabilia.... 220.127.116.11 12:50, 23 April 2008 (EDT)
A pug-nosed Belfast dog named Lennox has inspired a two-year legal fight and animal-rights protests on both sides of the Atlantic. But he’s about to die at the insistence of Belfast City Council.
Dog wardens deemed the pit bull-type dog a public danger and seized him from his family two years ago. Northern Ireland’s senior appeals court last month upheld two 2011 court rulings that Lennox should be put to sleep. The time for further legal appeals expired Tuesday.