From Wikitravel
Revision as of 20:57, 2 April 2006 by Keithonearth (Talk | contribs) (Article name)

Jump to: navigation, search

Notes 1 & 2 have been transferred from 'Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj' discussion page.


Hybrid McLeod Ganj / Dharamashala

What would people think of making these two into one article. It's kind of awkward having them as two, most of the transport info should be on the Dharamashala page, the sleep, eat, do, see, stuff should be on the McLeod Ganj page. The Dharamashala page even defines McLeod Ganj as part of Dharamashala. I know they are a 10 minute bus ride apart, but is that enough to justify giving them separate pages? Any responses?

I think the only way the could be one page is if one is where you stay to see the other... or if one is really just a district of the other... but if they're 10 minutes apart doesnt that require some info on how to get from one to the other? sorry if this isnt helping, I'm going to look more closely... Majnoona 14:55, 26 March 2006 (EST)
Ok. now that I've looked I think you're right-- there's no reason Dhramashala should only be Lower Dharamashala (I havent benn there, but I'm thinking it does quite need to be a Huge city with districts like Mexico City, etc...). Can you combine the info and then we'll make this a redirect to Dharamashala? Majnoona 14:58, 26 March 2006 (EST)


Article name

Uh, I'm not happy with this article name -- AFAIK, it should just be Dharamsala -- maybe with a redirect from McLeod Ganj. We have no precident for an article "Placename-slash-wellknown subplacename". I'd argue against it for a couple of reasons:

  • The slash in names is reserved for sub pages, specifically Districts in Huge cities.
  • Even if it weren't for the above, It looks messy
  • It doesn't help users, the search engine will get them here if they look for McLeod Ganj and the redirect will get them here if they look for it directly.

Anyone have any reason why this should stay here? Majnoona 20:25, 31 March 2006 (EST)

I also wanted to say "sorry" if my agreement to "merging" the two articles implied that the article should move to a hybrid name as well -- I don't think I was clear that the content should merge, but stay under Dharamsala. My bad!Majnoona 20:28, 31 March 2006 (EST)
Although you are more than welcome to change the slash to something else, yes, I do have reasons for calling the page Dharamasala/McLeod Ganj. First it has been up as two separate pages for some time, and this is to clearify that this page covers both. But more importantly Dharamashala and Mcleod Ganj are two places, but conventionally described, and always in the traveler community as Dharamasala. The important exception being when in McLeod Ganj one talks of Dharamasala (meaning lower).

While I can live with Dharamasala as the name for the hybrid page, I don't think that it's the best thing to do, and I'm surprised that it was moved back so quickly without discussion.keithonearth 16:53, 2 April 2006 (EDT)