I'm still not quite sure about how to include information for gays and lesbians into the article -- on the one hand, we don't want to stray from the templates, which don't provide for a section on gay and lesbian information. So it seems prudent to include it under the other headings like "See", "Drink" etc.
On the other hand, you probably do want to mark certain places clearly as "gay" or "lesbian", for two reasons:
gays will be especially interested in those. Many gays feel more at home in gay locations when going out, and like to check out the local scene when traveling to another city. (Cologne has about a million gays from all over Germany and the neighbouring countries visiting for Christhopher Street Day.)
most straight people will want to be warned before stumbling into a gay or lesbian location -- they don't want to go to a place because it was recommended in Wikitravel, only to sit there uncomfortably and ask each other, "Hey, do you know why there's only women in here?" Yes, in most cases it's perfectly acceptable for straight travellers to go to gay places (except if a woman wants to go to a fetish bar with darkroom ... d'oh!), but most will want to be forewarned.
So I guess there's three options:
include the info in subsections under "See", "Drink" etc. Doesn't break the template, makes it hard to hunt for information, you have to skip large pieces if you're not interested
use a special section "Gay" to group the information, with the usual subheadings ("See", "Drink", etc.), which makes it easy to find, easy to skip, but breaks the template.
Create a sub-article, for example Cologne/Gay. I don't see sub-articles used much in Wikitravel and don't know the policy.
If this is a general issue, this is perhaps better discussed under Gay and lesbian travel or in this style guide.
Well, this has come up before and I think the way to go is just to mention that it is a gay/lesbian/fetish/yuppie/etc bar in the listing for the bar. I really dont like the idea of having a seperate Gay article. I can't imagine ending up in a gay bar or seeing "gay sights" (whatever that would be) is any worse than ending up in a yuppie bar, or a dive bar when you thought you we're goign somewhere hip or posh. Do we really want Cologne/Older Peoplem, Colonge/Blondes, Colonge/People with dogs? I think if San Francisco can handle gay-stuff and not-gay stuff (where are the bi-s supposed to drink anyway? ;-)) in the same happy rainbow colored template, than so can Cologne. You might want to take a look at the Wikitravel:Manual of style for more about how articles are broken up. thanks Majnoona 13:17, 1 Mar 2004 (EST)
In support of what MAJ was saying, I'd like to say that I think the gay-friendlyness of a place deserves the same level of attention as its other aspects. Frankly I would be less dismayed by winding up in a gay place from a link here than winding up in a place full of the xenophobes. Let's just make it something we mention in the text about a place. Some places here in Swizerland for instance are mostly gay one or two nights a week. I think that's also true in Amsterdam, and Cologne, and elsewhere. I think that information for the traveler without bias is the way to go. For instance there is a more-or-less famous gay bar in Geneva which has fantastic folk music on Thursdays, so as a straight traveler, I would rather know the place as is and the details of which nights are more straight-oriented, without having it sequestered under a "Gay" heading where I might totally miss it. -- Mark 17:52, 1 Mar 2004 (EST)
Let's put it this way -- if you go there for the folk music, put it under the heading "Folk music", if you go there because it's gay, but it under the "Gay" heading. That seems the natural division for me. And, frankly, there are a number of places for which the only reason of existence is that they're "gay". ;) (Yes, I read the guidelines about sex tourism. Still.) -- FelixKatz 18:05, 1 Mar 2004 (EST)
There is no header "Folk music", nor should there be. In my example this would mean lising a place a number of times, under different headers. I think it's alot more resonable to expect travelers with a special interest to be able to take out a highlighter (or better yet control-f) and find the bits of an article which have to do with their interest. I can totally understand that it would be a bit more convienient for gay travelers who want to hook up to have their own section, but really isn't it better in the long run to mix places in? It's certainly less discriminatory. -- Mark 18:29, 1 Mar 2004 (EST)
Re-reading what you (FelixKatz) wrote at the opening of this page I can see what you mean. I (reluctantly) have to admit that sometimes places make it clear that they serve one clientel or another. My only reluctance at listing such places as I become aware of them is lack of expertise. Of course I still want to share the information, I just don't want to swear by the quality of the experience, 'cause if I send you there and you have a really bad experience I'll feel responsible for listing it without talking with anybody who goes there... Still there has to be some way to maybe just mix these in. Just 'cause lonely planet segregates doesn't mean we have to -- Mark 18:54, 1 Mar 2004 (EST)
It seems a bit of a shame that all the restaurants currently listed in the Eat section are non-German cuisine. Cologne has a vast horde of bars and restaurants that serve fantastic traditional German food. Unfortunately I don't know any of their names so can't add them myself. Anyone got any favourites they wish to add? --Lancevortex 10:09, 18 Jan 2005 (EST)