Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:San Francisco/Golden Gate"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(The Peter review)
(The Peter review)
Line 34: Line 34:
  
 
:::Yes, there is absolutely '''no''' bloat or padding in any of the articles I worked on.  The only exception was when I added some motels to Twin Peaks-Lake Merced and Southeast San Francisco, because as per discussion here [http://wikitravel.org/en/Talk:San_Francisco], they were lacking.  Now that I understand the ''complete'' definition a bit more I'll have offening listing removed poste-haste! [[User:Asterix|Asterix]] 17:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
 
:::Yes, there is absolutely '''no''' bloat or padding in any of the articles I worked on.  The only exception was when I added some motels to Twin Peaks-Lake Merced and Southeast San Francisco, because as per discussion here [http://wikitravel.org/en/Talk:San_Francisco], they were lacking.  Now that I understand the ''complete'' definition a bit more I'll have offening listing removed poste-haste! [[User:Asterix|Asterix]] 17:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::scratch that, it was just for Southeast San Francisco..they're removerd now.  [[User:Asterix|Asterix]] 18:03, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 22:07, 6 September 2008

Guide Article

Ok, we have been working a bit on this article, and although it definitely needs work - I think its a guide article now, so I am going to update its status. Fell free to change it back if you disagree. Asterix 15:43, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

I was just going to ask if you thought this was ready for an upgrade. I finally finished a map for this article. PerryPlanet 20:57, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

The Peter review

I'm stunned that there are hardly any errors for me to proof in this article! I also think this is our longest district article on the site (Chicago/Near North sheds a tear), but I agree with you that it doesn't look like it would make sense to further subdivide, from a neighborhoods, rather than a content organization, perspective. Anyway, fantastic work, and only a few bits of criticism/advice:

1) A section introduction for "See" is in order, and possibly for some of its subsections as well. There's so many sights there that it becomes overwhelming—I think a little prose is needed to call out the most interesting attractions. Perhaps you could organize the introduction by re-introducing the neighborhoods, with a particular view to their attractions?

2) A suggested itinerary would be really helpful for this district, since it's got so much content.

3) House of Magic needs hours

4) Crop out listings where possible. There's just so much in this article that it's easy to get bogged down in the listings. Where possible, I think it would be best to take out a few less interesting bars or restaurants, to allow the most interesting/highest quality recommendations to stand out a bit more. Subdividing further can work too—maybe separate the bars from clubs in "drink" rather than cut listings. I wouldn't crop the "see" section, though.

5) I auto-added a space after all ellipses, which is standard in American publishing. If you'd like me to do the same for other SF stars, let me know.

That's it! --Peter Talk 01:21, 6 September 2008 (EDT)


Thanks for the critique.
  • Now that you mentioned the weeping Near North article, I did a quick tally of listings. In the "Eat" section GG has only 2 more listings than NN, but in the "Sleep" section NN has actually 4 more listings than GG. I think that the difference in length is that GG tends to have more fax no's, emails, and directions... making it look longer. But, I like the extra info, and I am not fond of taking out some of these listings as that I believe would run afoul of the "complete" rule. Instead, I strategically moved a picture or two, which I think will help relieve the monotony of the black and white... you're right about that, it is easy to get goggle-eyed after a while! In the "Drink" section though GG did have 13 more listings than NN... but that was primarily due to the cafes in the area. Anyway, here I have separated clubs and wine bars from bars, so that should help. I've also added a picture too.
  • As regards the ellipses issue...I'll fix that..."edit-replace" right? I'll also add a section intro to the "See" section when I get a chance. Given its size, I was trying to keep the article shorter, but I think a short intro won't hurt here.
  • I've never used an itinerary before, I'll have to look at that one a bit.


Thanks again... Asterix 16:04, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Re: the ellipses—I'd recommend doing that in notepad, rather than word, since Word can sometimes throw in some formatting that doesn't square with wiki markup. The drink section looks a lot more manageable to me now. And the "complete" directive means, in my opinion, a complete set of real recommendations, rather than a complete guide to all places. But I'm sure the article already approaches the former rather than the latter. The picture sort really helps too—I didn't think of that. --Peter Talk 16:08, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Yes, there is absolutely no bloat or padding in any of the articles I worked on. The only exception was when I added some motels to Twin Peaks-Lake Merced and Southeast San Francisco, because as per discussion here [1], they were lacking. Now that I understand the complete definition a bit more I'll have offening listing removed poste-haste! Asterix 17:32, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
scratch that, it was just for Southeast San Francisco..they're removerd now. Asterix 18:03, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages