Talk:U.S. Virgin Islands
For future reference the Wikitravel:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Virgin Islands/CIA World Factbook 2002 import.
I'm having a hard time doing the Virgin Islands)(US) and British Virgin Islands as two articles... it's kinda like Lake Tahoe. I'm not sure many people really visit one with out drifting into the other. And pretty much everything is the same, they use USD in the BVIs for example... anyone have big issues with me pulling them together? Obviously the islands and towns will get their own articles which will mention which country they belong to... Majnoona 22:39, 8 Feb 2004 (EST)
I don't know if that's the solution, though I've no objection. I don't know the area. However, it seems odd to have "Virgin Islands" mean only the US part, with a link to "Virgin Islands archipelago" that leads nowhere. Methinks doing something to tie it together would be good. Pashley 19:30, 15 September 2006 (EDT)
I have no object to pulling them together. In either case, "Virgin Islands" should be "US Virgin Islands". That is their name after all.
-- U.S. Virgin Islands should not be combined with British VI. They are not the same. USD is not used exclusively in BVI, and they are most definitely two separate nations. Even though you can see Jost Van Dyke and Tortola from St. Thomas and St. John (respectively), you need a passport to get on that ferry. The people and customs are often quite a lot alike, even insofar as USVI laws differ from Continental US. Certainly many segments can be shared or used for both, but they should be separated.
Link for "Buy" takes aspring contributor to empty entry entitled "See", which is not seen in article. Edits to "Buy" are needed (entry is almost identical to that for St. Croix), but cannot be made with confidence until link is corrected. John Henne email@example.com
As mentioned above, I think this article should be moved to U.S. Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands is a transnational region encompassing both the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, so it seems jarring to have this article only cover the former. Any objections to a move & disambiguation? --Peter Talk 13:05, 11 June 2010 (EDT)