Talk:Off the beaten path in Alberta

From Wikitravel

Just a thought: this is supposed to be "off the beaten path". To me, the Calgary Stampede doesn't qualify as "off the beaten path." It seems like a well-trodden path to me. If the person who submitted it agrees, could you do the honors and take it out? Thanks

Considering the recent catastrophe with horses "off the beaten path" at the Stampede [1], it's just in bad taste. I'll take it out right now.

Now, here's my general concern: I'm not sure the whole "off the beaten path" thing works in the first place. Couldn't most of this information be moved to the pages for the destinations in question (Vulcan, say)? I'm just not sure that "off the beaten path" is really a field of pursuit in the same way that, say, off-road driving or literary history is. And, as this point shows, it's really not clear what's "on" or "off" the beaten path.

I think there's a value in, perhaps, a "roadside attractions of Alberta", but I'm just not convinced we need to ghettoize certain destinations or attractions by putting them in the "off the beaten path" genre. Comments? Ideas? --Evan 20:18, 15 Jul 2005 (EDT)

"off the beaten path" articles can have good value, but this one is an example of how not to write one. Stuff like the Stampede (probably the biggest annual event in Calgary) and Head-smashed in (a UNESCO site) are on the beaten path, not off. This seems to be a bunch of unrelated "things to do" lists all smashed into one article. To me, an OTBP article should be about interesting sites that are rarely seen. The first sentence of Off the beaten track in Japan pretty much sums up for me what an article like this should be like. -- Colin 20:52, 15 Jul 2005 (EDT)