So, I have kinda mixed feelings about this idea. My first feeling about this is that the information about culture should be in the country, region, or city guide. After all, culture is an important part of what you need to know when traveling to a place.
Second, I think that there is a place for culture guides that don't map directly to a geographical region.
I think we should try to map cultures to locales wherever possible. I think we should only have separate culture guides when:
- The culture spans so many geographical areas that it would be tedious to cover in each and every area.
- The culture is a minority culture with no specific geographical area attached.
So, I'd think that information about Catalan culture should go in the Catalonia guide, but maybe information about Gypsy (AKA Roma) culture might go in a separate Gypsy cultural guide, since its a culture spread all over Europe. Information about Asian immigrant culture in England may go in an British Asian culture guide, since it's a culture that's an important part of British life, but isn't localized to any one place.
This is probably what you're saying, though, Dhum Dhum.
I think my main worry is that we get to a point where we have two guides for any one place. Like, a Morocco guide, and a Moroccan culture guide.
Another possibility is having an Arab culture guide that provides a resource for someone working on the Morocco page; they can add relevant culture information there.
It's an interesting project. I tend to be pretty anal about keeping information pretty close to geographical points, though. Anyways, I guess I need to brood on this a while. --Evan 10:19, 7 Dec 2003 (PST)
I notice that the expedition page contains no links to actual guides, that it has not changed in over a year, and that this page has not changed in three. Am I right in assuming the idea is dead? If so, I don't think I'll mourn. If not, I'd like links to the guides. Pashley 08:13, 8 November 2006 (EST)\
VFD discussion, 2009
I am bringing this up because of postings on the talk page that were rather unenthusiastic (and posted years ago). Even if it is kept, perhaps calling attention to it here will at least get some other opinions about whether this is a dead idea (which then should be deleted) or whether it is a good idea that just needs more attention. ChubbyWimbus 21:27, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
- Even if we do declare it dead, I would recommend simply "deactivating" it rather than deleting the content. We can list it on Wikitravel:Expeditions as defunct or inactive. LtPowers 10:16, 15 July 2009 (EDT)
- Delete. I'm not yet a card-carrying member of the everything on the wiki muct be kept for posterity club. This expedition has had no significant updates since it was created, no activity on the actual expedition. It never took off, was probably never a good idea, has no useful content, and we should blow it away, and move on. --inas 00:07, 29 July 2009 (EDT)
- Delete. I agree with Inas, and besides the current format obviously is not working, if resurrected, it would need to be reformulated anyhow - besides the only expedition that really sees any sort of activity is the map making one. --Stefan (sertmann) talk 15:26, 26 October 2009 (EDT)
- My thought on it is that if we keep it around as inactive, it will better facilitate learning from previous mistakes. If someone goes looking to start a cultural expedition in the future, they can see there once was one and that it had problems, then take steps to avoid them. LtPowers 16:43, 26 October 2009 (EDT)
- Keep the article. Merely because the expedition failed to take off does not mean that it meets the criteria for deletion. The page documents an idea that someone had for Wikitravel. To delete it means we forget our history and are at risk of repeating it. It may be appropriate to reformulate the expedition at some time in the future, or it might give someone ideas to plunge forward and make it work. - Huttite 05:54, 3 November 2009 (EST)
- If the purpose of keeing this is to show others who may wish to start this expedition again that it is not a good idea, then perhaps it should be transferred to a Failed Expeditions page or something. Keeping it on the expedition page as an expedition means that it is still an operating expedition. Most likely, if someone did try to create a culture page as proposed (ex: Jewish Culture Guide, Japanese Culture Guide, etc.), it would end up a nomination for deletion, because everything listed in the Topic List already has a place in the country/region/city articles. ChubbyWimbus 15:03, 7 November 2009 (EST)
- Yes, my suggestion of marking it inactive would presumably include listing it as such on the Expeditions page. LtPowers 16:48, 7 November 2009 (EST)
- I went ahead and added a section on the Expedition page for "inactive expeditions". Feel free to make changes as you see fit, but there seems to be a consensus that this expedition is not worth keeping, so perhaps this can be archived? ChubbyWimbus 18:30, 7 November 2009 (EST)