Anyone and everyone seems to come to the Orlando page to add their own hotel, attraction, or business that is not really located in Orlando. Editors/Admins need to constantly monitor Orlando to either move the business to the correct city or delete it as SPAM. I believe this page should be put on permanent "semi protected" status. gamweb 13:51, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
There are two hotels which claim to be within the Disneyworld Glorious Leader Compound or something like that. When I click on their website links, they say they are in a city called Buena Vista. So I head on over to the bastion of truth, Wikipedia, and learn that yes there really is such a city; it is owned and operated by Disney and has a population of exactly 16 people. 16. Sixteen. I think Buena Vista should just redirect to Disneyworld, and we should move the Buena Vista hotels into the Disneyworld article. Does that sound right? -- Colin 23:50, 8 Dec 2004 (EST)
For the past few weeks there's been an "edit war" going on between at least a couple of editors (anonymous and with changing IP addresses, so it's hard to keep track) over listings in the Sleep section. That approach isn't going to settle it. I encourage you to instead read Wikitravel:External links for some guidance on what our policies are for accommodation listings and links, and discuss your viewpoint here, where other editors can offer their perspectives as well. (It would be helpful if you each created an account, and signed your comments (type ~~~~) so we can keep track of who's who.) Thanks! - Todd VerBeek 09:35, 20 April 2007 (EDT)
It would appear that the original "edit war" began when an anonymous user began removing legitimate and long standing references to reputable/notable Vacation Rental Home companies operating in the Orlando area and replacing/supplanting them with links to his own singular, un-notable privately owned vacation rental home. The user is simply trying to use Wikitravel as promotional vehicle for his own personal benefit/profit. His links were un-notable due to the fact that there are tens of thousands of other similar vacation rental homes in the Orlando area.
Therefore, I propose restoring the original, long standing links to the reputable legitimate companies offering vacation rental homes in Orlando and continue to block/removed those private owners of singular properties trying to abuse Wikitravel as a promotion vehicle for personal gain.
First, I reverted your edits and restored the comment asking the participants to discuss this before any further edits, because this issue has not been worked out. Can you do that, please?
Second, you seem to be applying Wikipedia's "notability" standard here, which isn't part of our criteria. I agree that it's completely inappropriate for one business owner to remove listings for other businesses. But it is not inappropriate for them to add a listing for their own business, because we want individual listings. That's part of what Wikitravel is here for: to give specific, fair recommendations. See Wikitravel:Don't tout for information about how business owners can contribute constructively to Wikitravel.
Third, I'm going to again point out Wikitravel:External links, because the web site you keep adding in place of these primary listings does not appear to fit with the site's policy. - Todd VerBeek 16:44, 20 April 2007 (EDT)
The sleep section here has gotten a bit out of hand. Yeah, I know: Orlando has hotels on every corner, and there's a demand for them... but this list should at least be split into Budget/Mid-range/Splurge (or is that "Splurge/Second-mortage/Bankruptcy"?) - Todd VerBeek 18:23, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
I might of placed a resource (Orlando Vacation Blog) in the wrong section. It might be better suited in the do section. Do others suggest that I move it? Thanks. -- Brent
I see lots of info placed in Orlando here that should be in surrounding cities (direct suburbs, and Walt Disney World). Orlando has plenty of attractions within City Limits that still need to be listed here. Lets move the info that belongs to surrounding cities to the correct location, otherwise this Orlando page will certainly become too large to manage. I see quite a few hotels that are located in other (surrounding) cities. I am going to start moving them out to the correct location. Gamweb 17:40, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
Makes sense to me. Hotels should be in the town/city they are physically in. Dumping stuff in the big city--especially when the city article isn't started is common, but not good practice. The traveler may want to stay outside Orlando, and needs to have the choices out there. OldPine 18:58, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
Thanks for doing the moves. -- Colin 19:09, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
The Boggy Creek Golf course is no longer in business.
This listing is in the tennis section of the article and it is for a massage service. So it doesn't belong there and I want to just delete it, but maybe somebody else can think of a place to put it. Carson 21:48, 19 June 2008 (EDT)
A-Team Massage has spammed all of Central Florida with their link (apparently, no address) so I am deleting them all as SPAM. (gamweb nli) 220.127.116.11 19:20, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
Is there a way to make this private, or moved to discussion? If wikitravel is supposed to be read as a travel guide, this section with it's reference to wikitravel and it's guidelines seems a bit out of place. What are people's thoughts on this? --MarinaK 21:00, 24 February 2009 (EST)MarinaK.
You're right, the Understand section needs some cleanup. The reference to WT guidelines should not be there, and other attraction references need to be made more concise. I'm gonna make a few changes now, and plan to make more in the future, but feel free to clean things up where you see fit. Jtesla16 22:27, 24 February 2009 (EST)
Well, back when I first joined Wikitravel, I saw that the whole article was just a mess (and still is). Much of what was/in this article is not in Orlando proper but in surrounding areas. However, for most tourists the whole region is considered Orlando...so the plan was to (soon thereafter) create a Greater Orlando article which would contain all this info and keep "Orlando" down to just Orlando proper (ie. within city limits). Of course, I eventually delved quite deep into WIkitravel and forgot about reworking this whole thing. AHeneen 20:46, 25 February 2009 (EST)
I deleted the disclaimer in Sleep for the same reasons as my deletion for the Understand section. Please let me know if you don't agree with this. Thanks. --MarinaK 17:55, 25 February 2009 (EST)MarinaK.
The disclaimer was there as every few days a new hotel would come along and write a long, touting entry; put its entry above everyone else's; or even delete another entry. I got sick of seeing new touting so often that I just put that big disclaimer there. It has worked somewhat (there's still a little touting going on), but I've moved on to other areas and have slacked on cleaning up Orlando. AHeneen 20:46, 25 February 2009 (EST)
Maybe we can include the disclaimer as a hidden comment on the page, which you will only see when you attempt to Edit the code. I forget the syntax for this. Jtesla16 20:55, 25 February 2009 (EST)
<!-- HTML comments go inside here --> LtPowers 20:58, 25 February 2009 (EST)
I took out a bunch of those worthless sleep entries with no information beyond website links, addresses, and phone numbers. But there is still an overwhelming quantity of them in the mid-range, and someone who knows the area better than I do should probably try to trim more of the less worthwhile entries. Ditto for that golf yellow pages section. And the eat section is screaming for sorting by price! --PeterTalk 03:26, 29 March 2009 (EDT)
Yes, I have found the same to still ring true for the Eat portion (whether they be split by resto type or price, something is needed...maybe I'll just plug away by listing them by type of resto!). I am going to add a price info box to the Sleep section, after having just doing a lot of cleanup on that and just about every section (a lot in the Do, See, Sleep, etc.). I also added Celcius temps after the F's, but am wondering since there's a nice temperate chart showing the highs/lows for each month, are the Spring/Summer/Autumn/Winter paragraphs needed? I'm all for removing those long paragraphs. Opinions? I'm also going to add some templates to the Sleep and other sections, which will hopefully increase the standardization. What I find to be really annoying is the phone book-like golf course listings...seriously, how is this any different from a phone book? Anyone else up for editing much of that section (I'm seeking many WTers opinions, so pls give 'em!) Zepppep 11:28, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
Putting a Celsius value after every Fahrenheit value seems a little excessive, but maybe that's only due to the excessive number of them. Prose is a good thing to have in a Climate description, but there's no need to duplicate the table, either. I'd suggest converting some specific values to general descriptions ("comfortable", "hot", "chilly", etc.). LtPowers 15:54, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
Yeah, perhaps by me putting a Celsius marker after pretty much every measure of temperature, it might allow some of the specifics temps to be changed to descriptors like you've mentioned. However, there are a lot of people from cooler states who may or may not agree with "chilly" or "humid," as their own states may have colder winters and less humid summers. I guess that might then confuse some folks, which is again why I was thinking so much of the prose section on climate can be reduced if not removed entirely (save the table).Zepppep 16:13, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
I just made a ton of edits to the site, and one of the things I had to spend correcting twice was the inclusion of the area code when dialing even local numbers. So if someone is thinking of making it so the area code doesn't need to be included, think again so you don't make the same mistake as me.Zepppep 16:15, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
I noticed under the "Do" section most if not all the entries include a link to the relevant location's external website, but most of these attractions have their own Wikitravel page. Is there any compelling reason why the name of the location doesn't link to its corresponding Wikitravel page? Hawkeyefla 16:21, 19 November 2011 (EST)
Nothing beyond the general bad shape this article is in. Plunge forward! LtPowers 17:05, 20 November 2011 (EST)