Shouldn't we outsource most of the CIA stuf? It's too many facts that are not so necessary for traveling. It makes the page harder to read.
- Yeah, probably. But it's nice having placeholders for stuff until real articles can be written. -- Evan 19:03, 4 Sep 2003 (PDT)
Placeholders are OK, but on the Peruvian page, a begining is already done. Tomorrow, I will have a look what I find to be important and outsource the rest on a new linked page. If you agree. -- Hans
I've removed the most irrelevant stats, the same as I've done on a number of other CIA factbook listings. Some of the rest are probably surpurflous(sp?) too... KJ 00:31, 5 Sep 2003 (PDT)
- "superfluous." B-) -- Evan 13:28, 5 Sep 2003 (PDT)
Thank you Karen for proofreading and reviewing. I could not resist and have shortend the statistics part from the factbook. The complete statistic is linked. --- Hans, 5 Sep 2003, 15:26 MEST (13:26 GMT)
- I don't even think the link is really all that necessary. If someone needs invasion statistics for Peru, they can find that info elsewhere. We really need the travel info. As an aside: Hans, you should really set up a user account so we can all talk to you! I assume you've been doing all the great work on Peru -- keep up the great work. Also, I wonder if we could move part of this discussion to the factbook import talk page. -- Evan 13:28, 5 Sep 2003 (PDT)
I really like all the Peru content, but I'm having trouble with all the "(department)" article names. Are these needed? According to the naming conventions these geograpical units should be used to distinguish two places with the same name (ie New York the city and New York the state). Is there really more than one of all of these? Or is the department always named after the capital? And if that wasn't enough, wouldn't having (Peru) help too? I'm actually going to open a big can of worms about this one the naming conventions page, but I thought I'd poke at a real example first. Majnoona
Wikitravel is great! I just added some of my own experiences from Peru last year. However, I strongly disagree with the contention that you will get diarrhoea unless you stay at expensive hotels and be careful about what you eat. This is very different for different parts of the country. In Huaraz, we lived fairly inexpensively, but it was very nice and clean. We used to eat at quite expensive restaurants, yet, we all got diarrhoea, and I got it bad (I did some really serious shitting at 6000 meters... :-) ). We spent some time in Cusco before we went to Huaraz, lived at some inexpensive but very clean and nice youth hostels, and ate at inexpensive restaurants. I returned to Cusco after Huaraz, alone, and 12 hours after returning to Cusco, my stomach was again well. In Cusco, I had no problems eating anything, please see my Cusco and Pisac edits. I'd buy food from kids on the streets, I'd sit down with the locals to have lunch, I'd buy bread through the train windows. That worked absolutely great for me. In the sunday market at Pisac, it became evident why this worked: in the pile of tomatoes, you bet there weren't one single bad one. Really, I've travelled a lot, but I have never seen anything of that quality anywhere else in the world. I'm not logged in. My name is Kjetil Kjernsmo, I'm Norwegian.
- Great, the first one who begins to discus the travel related stuff on the Peru pages. Hi, Kjetil, I like your addings to the Cuzco page and the new Pisac page. Concerning the diarrhoea, I just wanted to say that you should reckon with getting it when travelling Peru. Of course, eating food sold on the street may work quite well, if you are lucky. But sometimes, when seeing sellers cleaning their food in the gutter, you could get some kind of bad feeling, anyway. At the other hand, you don't know what happens in the kitchen of a restaurant, either. So, feel free to change my text in order to find a better way to express the hygienical standards. -- Hansm 01:09, 2003 Nov 11 (PST)