I figure I should address this before anyone questions the validity of this article. I think I can make an excellent article out of this subject as we have done with Hostels, which is an article in itself.
I currently am a member of about 5 or six different hotel chains' loyalty programs and have stayed at many hotels in the past year. I would like to ask for about four weeks before this article is deleted, because my access to the web is very limited ( one or two days a week). Should by then we decide the work is not worth it please go ahead and do what the consensus is.
I am wondering how this article might evolve. My initial concern is its title is very general. What are we likely to write about here? What a hotel is , or isn't? The various hotel chains? Their loyalty programmes? The benefits and disadvantages of this type of accommodations?
Could some aspects of this topic be better covered by Wikipedia? Like the history, business and economic aspects. As the topic stands it is very broad. I would prefer a more explanatory title like Hotel chains' loyalty programmes. That said, I think what has been written so far looks interesting. Whether it is of value is another question. -- Huttite 01:11, 27 Nov 2005 (EST)
Actually, I have a semi-article sitting around on my hard-disk about what hotel star ratings mean, which I've finally added to main page. I agree with Sapphire that, as an extremely frequent hotel stayer, reviews of hotel chains in general are useful. Jpatokal 06:35, 27 Nov 2005 (EST)
I tried to edit this article, but there was a "conflict" since you also edited the article at the same time. I'm going to change the Accor paragraph. If you like it the way you had it before I did anything just change it. Sapphire 03:32, 30 Nov 2005 (EST)
Grand old hotels
A new user added this section with a link to a new article, so by the time this comment is written the new article may already have been created, but if not let's start out by listing "Grand old hotels" on the Hotels page, and only if the list gets long, complicated, or there is a consensus to create a separate article should a new article be created. One of the goals of Wikitravel is to have complete guides, which means avoiding lots of sub-pages when they aren't necessary. -- Ryan 05:33, 12 April 2006 (EDT)
I'm too lazy to sign in, but I second Ryan's idea. - User:Sapphire
It was me that created that section, and I'm not pleased that someone took it out. The Grand old hotels page currently has about 20 hotels from half a dozen contributors. I'd say it is worth keeping and needs more than a "see also" link here. Pashley 04:46, 20 April 2006 (EDT)
I think those 20 hotels would fit on this page. Still, I'm not sure I like having a list of individual hotels outside of the destination guides. After all, there are probably thousands of "Grand Old Hotels" around the world, so this list is going to be huge eventually if it continues. Don't you think the data would be better placed in the destination guides? -- Mark 05:05, 20 April 2006 (EDT)
I'd like to tighten the Grand Old Hotels criteria enough that there aren't thousands... every one in the list should be a destination in itself. And there actually are people who travel purposely to visit them, I met a safari lodge owner in Zambia (!) last year whose idea of a vacation is a week at one. Jpatokal 06:00, 20 April 2006 (EDT)
If we add Europe this list will get very long. By any of the criteria I've seen discussed there are three Grand-Old hotels in Lausanne, 4 or 5 in Montreux, and around a dozen in Paris. Perhaps modern renovation should disqualify them? That way the Ritz is still in but the totally updated Hilton Paddington is out... -- Mark 06:43, 20 April 2006 (EDT)
Now that the article has been created you can probably restore the section within this article that links to it. I originally removed it because it was added by an anonymous user and I was hoping to get the "Grand Old Hotels" information to start out as a section within a more relevant article before being branched off - we have a condition that large attractions such as Disneyland or Angkor Wat only get their own articles once their section in the corresponding town becomes large and complex, and it seemed to make sense to do that here as well. Since the Grand Old Hotels article is already fairly large and complex I don't think it makes sense to move it back into the hotels article. -- Ryan 10:45, 20 April 2006 (EDT)
I put it back. Methinks the criteria for a Grand old hotel include that is was at some point the place to stay, so by defintion there can be only one per city or at most one per major district. Pashley 20:55, 20 April 2006 (EDT)