Please consider that this page is still growing and I am at the beginning. I reverted back to one of my previous versions, because I was not happy about moving parts from Understand section to the see section, because I intend to write a extensive see section with several subsection as indicated. I hope that I considered all spelling suggestions from Nzpcmad and Jaktobal (Thanks for that) but maybe I missed some out.
The next couple of days I am going to work on the camp sites to get some meat on those and then I can probably work on the fun part: see section. Meanwhile I am still uploading some more pics and I hope somebody can help to arrange them nicely.
I ask SANPark for the right to use their map on Wikitravel and that was their answer.
It is not a very useful map, but if it helps you - you may use it.
There is only one condition - you need to acknowledge the source of info and provide a link to www.SANPark.org from the material itself.
SANParks, South Africa
Comments on KNP map
Unfortunately, I think this means that we cannot use this here. Since we re-license stuff using Wikitravel:Copyleft which does not enforce any such conditions, this is incompatible with Wikitravel. Thanks for trying though!
And if you're wondering why.... our idea here is that we want our guides to be reusable by hotel operators or tourist bureaus or the local library who can just print our stuff our (with an attribution to the original author(s)) and go ahead and photocopy away. We need to have just One Set of rules that these folks need to obey in order to reuse our stuff rather than forcing them to check every page and every image being reproduced to make sure it doesn't have extra conditions. Secondly, it's really hard to link back to sanpark's website from a piece of paper :-).
And again, thanks for trying so hard to both improve Wikitravel and do the Right Thing. I wish more people were as careful as you! -- Colin 15:54, 7 Oct 2004 (EDT)
I think the map is good start, but it needs a lot more work. It does not provide information about gates and the camp listing is not complete. So I will do a better map as soon as I finished with the major work on the KNP.
Instead of concentrating all the (excellent) photos & descriptions here in Kruger National Park, should we create a separate "African flora and fauna" page that could be linked to by any other safari and/or African national park pages? Jpatokal 08:03, 12 Oct 2004 (EDT)
I could put that on my to do list and incorporate those pic and plants in other national park in Kenya, Tanzania once I get the KNP in a decent shape. Although, there are slight differences in fauna and flora between KNP, the Kalahari, Kenya,Tanzania and other parks. In the KNP you spot Zebras in small numbers and in Kenya you can see 100.000 and more in a herd just to mention one difference.
The KNP article, as good as it is, is a bit long with 40kb. I would say that the animal section could be shortened a bit, as there is now the really good African flora and fauna guide. What do you think? If no one rejects, I would clean the article within the nect days. 25/April/2005 - 14h30 GMT Felix
Well I think the article would benefit if one could provide more information about camps and atraction which I have not not covered. The animal and plant section is also quiet short and would benefit from some more pics rather than chopping it off.
Agree on the camps and attractions. Photos are also good. But why not shorten the description of animals a bit? It would be easy to set a link to African flora and fauna, so that interested people could follow this link. For most people it is more interesting how and where to find animals and how to identify them, than having big explanations about their breeding habits... Felix
Oh yes, we can revert the version again and again, but where is the sense in that??? Felix
Articles for bigger camps
what about creating articles for each of the camps? They would be easier to find and the KNP article wouldn't be so crowded... Would make more sense in my opinion to put everything about the Skukuza Camp, like restaurants, accommodation, facilities and good game drives around the camp in one article, than to squezze everything into the KNP article. Opinions?
Hmmm, I'm not sure if I like having an article just for "Camps" -- it would be like having "Hotels in New York" which really goes against our article guidlines. What about treating camps like districts? Even if we do move towards camp aticles, all the general/overview information should go in the mail Kruger National Park article... Majnoona 10:32, 17 May 2005 (EDT)
Agree with Maj here, this division doesn't really make sense and I think the animal stuff should be shunted out into African flora and fauna instead, except maybe for critters that really are unique to KNP. 40k is not that much for an article, Japan is already pushing 100K. Jpatokal 11:12, 17 May 2005 (EDT)
Totally agree on the animals (see discussion above). I actually wanted to treat the camps district like (see link created in the camps article: Kruger National Park/Skukuza). It would make it much easier to find information about a single camp. We could also add more facts, like the best routes to take from there, good animal spots or the nearest waterhole... It think all this would be a bit much for the Kruger article itself. Cheers, Felix - 10:33 (GMT), 19/May/2005
Sabi Sabi, Mala Mala in 'Get Out' ??
As far as I know, the 'Get out' section should contain modes of transport. Currently it contains 2 places to stay which should IMHO move to the 'sleep' section. Not only that, but the list is also very incomplete. E.g. Singita which has been voted the best hotel in the world is not even mentioned.