To user jpatokal!
Why do you keep removing my link? It's good website with many visitors everyday. It offers an in-depth view
about the area visited. It serves as a complement to Lonely Planet books and websites such as this.
I was also thinking about writing some articles here, but that may not be welcome either?
- Greetings and welcome to Wikitravel. You are very welcome to contribute your own content here, but Wikitravel has a fairly strict policy for external links: basically, all Wikitravel articles should be self-sufficient and we do not link to secondary sources (like other travel guides or image galleries). Jpatokal 11:14, 29 Dec 2004 (EST)
Splitting Southeast Asia
I wonder if it would be at all of value to split Southeast Asia into its insular and peninsular subsections. --Evan 00:31, 8 Dec 2005 (EST)
- As someone who lives and travels extensively in the regions, I would say no. It's a fairly coherent whole, there is no natural dividing line, and 11 countries is reasonably close to the 7+/-2 ideal. Jpatokal 01:18, 8 Dec 2005 (EST)
- That's what I think, too. --Evan 01:41, 8 Dec 2005 (EST)
There are now 9 cities, but there is no city from Vietnam. I see Laos is featured twice, with both Vientiane and Luang Prabang. Two questions: which city of Vietnam should be included, Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City? And which of Laos should we let go? --globe-trotter 17:35, 14 January 2010 (EST)
- I vote for Luang Prabang and Ho Chi Minh City, they are not the capitals but IMO they are the most interesting cities of the two countries, ClausHansen 17:45, 14 January 2010 (EST)
- I thought the same, will apply this for now. If anyone objects, I'll hear it here. --globe-trotter 13:31, 17 January 2010 (EST)
Should Penang be on the list? No doubt it has a very rich cultural heritage, good food and should be on the destination of any traveller but it is not a particularly big city. I would say maybe Hanoi be on the list instead of Penang as it is a much bigger city. Penang can be sufficiently covered in the Malaysia article. Superdog 11:58, 20 January 2010 (EST)
- Agreed. I have never really looked at that list carefully. I cannot think why Penang is there - it is not much of a city by Asian standards, nor an especially interesting one for travellers. Hanoi (especially), Vientiane or Phnom Penh could replace it.--Burmesedays 11:59, 20 January 2010 (EST)
- Penang's not a city at all, we should be listing George Town (Malaysia) if anything, but I agree it doesn't really belong here. Hanoi is probably tops of the three you list, although I could be argued into supporting Phnom Penh as well (it's a bit funny for Vietnam alone to get two cities, when Cambo, Brunei and East Timor have none and way bigger Indon manages with one). Jpatokal 03:37, 21 January 2010 (EST)
- One per country is a better idea I think, having 2 from Vietnam is a bit strange. I'd go for Phnom Penh. Before Vientiane was listed, we could put it back, but then Laos would have 2 cities (though that is more acceptable as Laos has no listing in the "other destinations" list). --globe-trotter 04:54, 21 January 2010 (EST)
- Very good point that Penang is not a city at all! I would be happy with any of the three Indochinese cities suggested previously. --Burmesedays 04:59, 21 January 2010 (EST)
- I'll be happy with any of them, but I think if you factor in economic importance, it should be Hanoi on the list. In fact, I would think that Luang Prabang should be covered under other destinations, while Vientiane or Phnom Penh replace Luang Prabang. Superdog 11:14, 21 January 2010 (EST)
- LP is an interesting one, but it is a city. It is just an insanely charming, clean and unusual city. --Burmesedays 11:18, 21 January 2010 (EST)
vietnam and capitalism
Vietnam ist totally not on the road to capitalism ,it's an communist country —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs)
- Officially, yes; in reality, only in part. - D. Guillaime 16:19, 20 January 2010 (EST)
- No, but i know why you think that, the american new agencys tell that lie. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs)
- I think those of us who have actually been there (and don't get our news from American news agencies in the first place), can also testament to the fact that Vietnam is very much trying their best to follow in the footsteps of China, which while also officially communist, is very much a Capitalist Technocracy in reality. --Stefan (sertmann) talk 17:21, 20 January 2010 (EST)
- It is a rampantly capitalist country as any recent visitor will testify. In places this is even out of control - the Vietnamese are less proficient than the Chinese at imposing centralised technocracy. That's probably a good thing. --Burmesedays 21:43, 20 January 2010 (EST)
- Why should they want to be capitalists? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs)
- Don't know, ask them? In either case, a much better solution than trolling around, is to think up a neat replacement that everyone can agree on - provided of course you are looking for a solution rather than conflict. --Stefan (sertmann) talk 13:08, 21 January 2010 (EST)
- Hey why not just say, "Firmly marching down its own road forward" ?