Is there really a need from the traveller's point of view to separate Taipei County, or could we just lump these as districts under Taipei itself? Jpatokal 04:28, 3 Jan 2006 (EST)
Dearest Jpatokal, sir. Taipei is a very large city. It needs to be broken up into districts in the same way as London, Tokyo or even smaller cities like Seattle are. If you list the cities in Taipei County under Taipei City, you will have a long dangling list (the list so far is far from complete). Maybe to get some prospective on the sitution, ask yourself would you include Saitama Prefecture or Kanagawa Prefecture and their municipalities under Tokyo? If, yes, then please put the towns back into Taipei. If not, then I suggest leaving them as separate listings. Anon. 3 Jan 06
I'm trying to understand if Taipei County should be considered a part of Taipei or a region. If you think it is much too large to squeeze under Taipei, then it should be kept as a region, in which case cities in Taipei County should be individual destinations ("Danshui") and not districts ("Taipei County/Danshui"). Jpatokal 05:00, 3 Jan 2006 (EST)
Actually, Taipei County is larger in both area and population than Taipei City (The former having around 3.5 million with the latter only around 2.5 million), so it probably not a good idea to try to squeeze the county info into the city article. For the sake of keeping the Taipei City article simple, I think it best to list the cities in Taipei County as individual destinations, as you suggest. Furthermore, as all Taiwan's cities are surrounded by a county of the same name, the problem will arise again later, so it is advisable to make the decision regarding this now. Please indicate if you want to list the cities as individual destinations, and I'll get to it. Anon. 3 Jan 06
No need for a reply. I checked how surrounding cities are listed in similar articles covering metropolitan areas and used these as models. All destinations in Taipei County are now listed as individual destinations. Hope that is ok with you. Anon. 3 Jan 06
The Wikitravel:Article naming conventions say that each destination gets its own name. If you should define a destination as a separate community that has a surrounding countryside that separates it from other communities. A community that has local government representation, such as a town council and mayor, is a reasonable guideline. Though if an area has several small communities that are each represented by (a) politician(s) then they should probably be separate destinations too. Unfortunately, there is no exact rule and each case will be different.
The City/District format should be used when a neighborhood does not have a distinctly separate community area, but it is an important part of a city or town, such as the city centre or CBD, government centre, university campus or a shopping or entertainment part of town - if the city has been planned that way. Generally this needs to be done only when the main destination page becomes so big it becomes hard to understand, with hundreds of listings for places to see, sleep, eat, drink, things to do etc.
Unless the City and County cover exactly the same area, using the city name for the city article and City County for the surrounding county is a reasonable thing to do. -- Huttite 06:37, 3 Jan 2006 (EST)
Taipei County will be turned into one municipality (city) known as Xinbei (see ). Obviously this does not need to have implications for Wikitravel, but maybe we should rename this section and use the Huge City template for the separate destinations. --globe-trotter 05:42, 27 July 2010 (EDT)
The process is complete, and the authorities chose the name New Taipei. Still not sure how to deal with this, as its now officially one municipality. However, if we want to use the huge city template, its 29 official districts are too many. The 10 districts Banqiao, Luzhou, Sanchong, Shulin, Tucheng, Xizhi, Xindian, Xinzhuang, Yonghe, and Zhonghe are by far the largest ones, so I guess we'd have to combine other areas together and make them sensible districts. --globe-trotter 06:33, 14 October 2011 (EDT)