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

Talk:Tips for rail travel

From Wikitravel
Revision as of 15:20, 12 February 2010 by Burmesedays (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


I wonder how usefull this is going to be-- are there really train tips that are general enough to apply to all countries? I mean besides "don't be late" and "women should be careful"? Maybe focus this on the EU or something? Majnoona 11:01, 8 Mar 2004 (EST)

I agree with Maj. I'm not even convinced we need a separate article for EU train travel (or any other region for that matter). If it's going to be regional it should come under "get around" of that region. DhDh 11:56, 8 Mar 2004 (EST)
It could be worth a try shaping it like Tips for hitchhiking. First the general stuff, and then country specific information. Guaka 18:32, 4 May 2004 (EDT)
Like Tips for hitchhiking, I think the country-specific stuff needs to be on the country pages. While there are some people who do travel just to be on trains, the more general traveller (our audience) doesnt usually think "I want to take a train, should I go to Asia or Europe?" They know where they are going and need the train info to be there.... Majnoona 01:11, 16 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Anybody knows a good site to find train routes and ticket prices? I have horrible experiences with using rail companies' own websites for international train travel... Guaka 15:16, 15 May 2004 (EDT)

Try Seat61. Note that it doesn't even attempt to have up-to-the-minute pricing though... Jpatokal 04:56, 17 May 2004 (EDT)

Shouldn't the regional railtravel tips be simply included in the appropriate articles? We'll either end up with information here that will be missing from the articles, or we will have redundant information in two places. Either way, a bad idea. -- Nils 03:17, 15 Jul 2004 (EDT)

US, Europe, Canada, North America, Tips[edit]

So instead of having three overlapping and (to varying degrees) redundant articles, we now have five (Europe, US, Canada, North America, tips) with Mexico yet to come. Frankly, I didn't see that great a need to split between the U.S. and Canada; moving the "how to find a seat on a train" suggestions to the "tips" article would have brought the North America article down to a reasonable size. (Plus American Orient Express and one of the rail passes apply to both countries.) Any chance we can work out a consensus about how to handle this before putting too much more work into it? - Todd VerBeek 12:31, 5 April 2006 (EDT)

The reason North America was broken up is for the reason Evan cited as seeing this turn into various articles. "It seems like we've got one big page with two topics." I also cite Evan from an email he replied to "I could see it becoming an organizing page for Rail travel in Canada, Rail travel in the United States, and Rail travel in Mexico, possibly with other pan-continental information (like the North America pass, for example)."
Additionally, the reason I'm hostile towards Tips is because it isn't as user friendly as Rail travel in the United States or Rail travel in Canada, where the person using this information will know that the information provided in the US article know that the information is reliable for the rail travel in US. The problem with Tips is that it does offer some very good information, however, some (not all) of the information is useless to riders in Canada or the US, but the same information is useful to someone who is traveling in the UK. Sapphire 12:49, 5 April 2006 (EDT)
I don't want to do this without getting input from others, but if we arranged the tips in the Tips article into regions like ===Tips for North America=== or ===Tips for Asia=== the Tips article would be much more user friendly. We would be able to eliminate this information from the US and Canada articles, merge both articles into North America, again (North America would be a much more reasonable size than it was previously), add any information from Mexico in. Would that be an appealing compromise to everyone? Change the format of Tips and in place delete US and Canada a move everything back to North America? Sapphire 12:57, 5 April 2006 (EDT)

vfd discussion[edit]

Delete. I incorporated the useful info into Rail travel in Europe. I will incorporaate the same info into Rail travel in North America. The same content is covered in both articles, however the American and European articles are much more useful as they provide information on routes. Sapphire 07:37, 24 March 2006 (EST)

  • Keep. Looks quite like a valid travel topic to me. I don't think that the overlapping info would be enough reason for deletion. This is a wiki and just because an article's content isn't complete enough right now, it doesn't me it could never be. Ricardo (Rmx) 17:36, 28 March 2006 (EST)
  • Keep. Duplicating the general info in two articles makes it harder to maintain that info. The information that's specific to each continent can be put in "see also" articles, which also link to the article with general info. - Todd VerBeek 17:39, 28 March 2006 (EST)
  • Update. All the info I thought was revelant to North American article was moved to the North American article. I'm still not persuaded, myself, however, I'm fairly liberal and am willing to flip-flop if the political wind eventual takes me there. Sapphire 17:49, 28 March 2006 (EST)
  • Keep. If it's really necessary, perhaps use template transclusion (like {{:Tips for rail travel}}) to copy the contents of this article into [[Rail travel in XXX]]? --Evan 12:29, 5 April 2006 (EDT)
  • Keep. Objection withdrawn. Sapphire 16:01, 6 April 2006 (EDT)

Stating the bleeding obvious[edit]

Never more so than in this article! --Burmesedays 10:15, 12 February 2010 (EST)



Destination Docents

In other languages