Thank you for your message. The site linked is really useful and not commercial. It contains all the information updated regarding to trains in Vietnam: different routes, schedules and fares. It will definitely help many travellers, since most of this information cannot be found in english anywhere else. I understand it'd be a bit redundant to post it in the country page as well as in main cities pages, but I was just following the same example as Hyperdia, mentioned in Japan country page and quoted as well in several Japanese cities pages. Basically, Baolau is for Vietnam the same concept as Hyperdia to Japan, so I understand the same rules could apply.
Hi again! Well, the idea when it comes to Wikitravel is to make it as printable-friendly as possible (among other reasons). I did check the website and indeed, it looks quite useful that's why we allow it on Vietnam main page. Town/cities pages are actually more devoted to specific infos more than trip planning, so the traveller can spot in a blink the restaurant, temple or whatever he/she is looking for. Thanks for your contribution, Amorenot! 11:05, 16 February 2014 (EST)
Thank you for the explanation, I understand the guidelines. Just wanted to clarify that I didn't post it for spam purposes, since the website is informational only, and that I followed Hyperdia's example on Japan. --Amorenot (talk) 11:34, 16 February 2014 (EST)
Absolutely, feel free to add a new contribution any time you want, we are happy to have you among us. PierrB (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2014 (EST)
Thank you, I added more information to the section of Get Around / Train. Hope my contribution is useful. --Amorenot (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2014 (EST)
I think you made a little mistake there. I have not remove or replaced the Hostal you are referring to, or any other. Perhaps you have clicked on the wrong user. My contributions so far are related to grammar and small details only. I would appreciate your confirmation on this, for I would not like to be consider as a bad contributor on this great community. Many thanks !
Mike Toulsen (talk) 10:41, 5 May 2014 (EST)
Hi PierrB !
I understand that you are one of the moderators for the Guatemala section. I wanted to ask you if I could (or perhaps your self) update some of the biz lists for Guatemala and Antigua Guatemala. I noticed that a couple of links should be updated, two restaurants in Antigua and one Hotel are no longer in business. How can this data be updated? Many thanks !
Mike Toulsen (talk) 09:25, 7 May 2014 (EST)
Thank you for your kind message. I appreciate it. Will make a few adjustments little by little and if you dont mind, will report this to you just to make sure I am doing things right. Thanks !! Mike Toulsen (talk) 07:42, 8 May 2014 (EST)
Hi Pierre - i had trouble converting some Get Out entries in the Batu page into listings [initially those entries were from the "See" section]. Would you help me please?
merci beaucoup :) ... i hope my spelling was right :D
great. i'm looking forward to updating some more information in that page and elsewhere. merci beaucoup :)
Hi Pierre - what do you think needs to be added to make Batu a guide article, apart from dividing the hotels and restaurants into categories such as "budget, mid-range, splurge"? merci beaucoup :) --Siung99 (talk) 00:04, 4 September 2014 (EDT)
sounds good. merci beaucoup :) --Siung99 (talk) 08:26, 4 September 2014 (EDT)
I noticed you removed an edit I made for Angeles City, which was replacing a link to a defunct site, with one that has up to date information. Why no linking to external sites? The list of bars, restaurants and hotels on here is pretty limited (12 bars, 3 of which are in Diamond Subdivision, which is not in the main tourist area; while there are over 100 bars of interest to tourists). The newer site has many more places and would make a good companion to Wikitravel page. Perhaps it should be listed in a different place on the page? Thanks for your consideration.
Hello! Thanks for your message. Please have a look on Wikitravel External links page; it provides with clear explanations on the topic.
Indeed, so far, the sections you mention are limited, but the all thing is about contributing; either I am a tourist, in AC for business or a local, anyway I tried a nice place, so I'll add a Listing to AC page trying to give some inputs about it. Of course it takes more time, especially for places that don't receive billions of visitors every year, but it's part of the game! And at least, it personalized and definitely not sponsored. Hope this makes more sense... And if one day you feel up to add a new listing, either Diamond Subdivision or not, please go for it!
Best regards, PierrB (talk) 01:46, 10 September 2014 (EDT)
How did my edits mess up the page? I removed duplicative info and combined duplicative sections.
Hi! the districts description must be kept short, simply because big paragraphs in this section creates gaps as the space is shared with the map. It's OK, and encouraged, to correct something that is wrong or obsolete, but massive changes should be considered twice on pages that have been existing and constructed over the years. As I indicated, your edits contained good elements, but the overall effect doesn't help the traveller. Thank you!
OK I will revert my edits but I will fix the district section to make it more concise.......
Seems like a useful new idea for travellers and I am unaware of any policy prohibiting its inclusion in an "Eat" section so I've reversed your deletion on the San Francisco page as an experiment.
It shouldn't appear on multiple pages, though and the question is which page is the most appropriate... --Ttcf (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2014 (EDT)
You ask the most relevant question: "It shouldn't appear on multiple pages, though and the question is which page is the most appropriate".
Answer is none, and that's one of the two reasons it is not allowed: because it is generic (Did you noticed the used posted it on SF, but also NYC, Paris & Rome?). The other reason is: do you want Pizza Hut delivery showing up on every page of every single city and town?
I agree with you, it's a nice service, so are Couchsurfing, airBnB and hitch-hiking websites, yet they are not allowed here either. On the other hand, it fits on "tips for traveller" pages, because it is generic. Hope you see my point. PierrB (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2014 (EDT)
We have a policy against multiple listings of generic services, I agree, but I'm unaware (and I've been here longer than anyone except Nurg, you know) of any policy that would forbid inclusion of Couchsurfing and airBnB on a suitable generic page.
The same applies to German MFZ on the Germany page which have had a listing for more than 9 years. The main reason I reversed you was that your edit summary would probably not have been understood by the spammer. That's not to say that we shouldn't clarify our policies after discussion and a consensus, of course... --Ttcf (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2014 (EDT)
"On a suitable generic page". Once again, you nailed it. City pages are not generic. It has been indeed discussed (the Couchsurfing/AirBnB point), but I just can't remember where it was. It the Pub probably, but... So somebody should create a page on the model of Hospitality exchange, as I do know at least another network related to web-supported alternative catering. (Can't remember the name either, sorry but anyway it is no isolated case) I may post later something in the pub for that, in order to find volunteers or knowledgable people to take care of that... And yes, let know the higher autorities some policies updates are requested.
Looking for arguments in other versions in not really relevant, as they usually come with obsolete (when not vandalized) policies that we try to update bit by bit, but since their respective community is way smaller, it just takes way much time PierrB (talk) 23:33, 28 October 2014 (EDT)
I think it's very important that our policies are developed and codified.
Otherwise, it destroys any hope of community participation and development by looking as if it's simply a matter of fickle personal preference. Feel free to revert my edit at SF, Pierre... --Ttcf (talk) 23:39, 28 October 2014 (EDT)
Nice discussion and solid points to be made. I don't think we'll ever truly have a complete set of policies. We're a crowd-sourced site which means we are just as vulnerable to tech and society changes as the general population is. AirBnB, eatwith.com, even Uber(which I suspect will eventually begin to show up here under the ubiquitous "Get around" section) are all children of web 2.0 and the adoption of smartphones. Maybe the best we can do is have a set of policies in place while acknowledging that they may change as time progresses.
Anyway, I digress. We already decided in the traveller's pub that we're not allowing listings for the same company/entity to appear on multiple pages. Still, there should be a place for these cool little sites that enrich or ease the travellers' trip. What do you say we create a new article here? It seems like a fitting place to host "Tips for travellers" or something of the like.IBcaldera (talk) 13:57, 29 October 2014 (EDT)
Correct and I concur. --Ttcf (talk) 21:03, 29 October 2014 (EDT)
The travel warning in the Chicago article appears to have been added by a vandal with the username Conserve/Bentup whom was adding warning boxes to other cities which really did not warrant such harsh alerts, such as Harvey, Illinois, and Chicago Heights, Illinois. Given the consensus seemed to have been reached by the vandal, at least according to the Chicago page's history, and given the very harsh wording of the warning for the area intended (south of 127th street isn't all that bad, definitely nothing like esl), I feel it is not needed in the stay safe section of the Chicago article. Thanks. --22.214.171.124 18:43, 11 December 2014 (EST)
Certainly the editor(s?) you mentioned had an obsession with adding warnings that some other editors considered disproportionately alarmist.
Do you have a good contemporary knowledge of Chicago (and, perhaps more importantly, other cities/districts that have these kind of warnings legitimately added)?
If not, it would be good to discuss the situation on the relevant articles' discussion pages... --126.96.36.199 19:27, 11 December 2014 (EST)
Ok, I have posted this on the Chicago article's talk page. I do have a basic knowledge of the city and I don't believe the warning is warranted, but I will see what others think. --188.8.131.52 19:50, 11 December 2014 (EST)