There was a problem with the spam filter that should now be resolved - sorry for any trouble it might have caused you! -- Ryan • (talk) • 11:52, 14 June 2010 (EDT)
Thank you for your contributions! We do generally not put dates in edits as it will make WT look less updated than it is, see the discussion here, --ClausHansen 09:46, 5 October 2010 (EDT)
I am not convinced. This is the way a wikitravel salesperson(!) looks at the topic, not from the point of view of a traveller. For a traveller this is essential information!
Swissbelg 04:39, 6 October 2010 (EDT)
I do not agree, and as you can see from the discussion, we reached consensus on this, but please feel free to take up the discussion again, --ClausHansen 04:49, 6 October 2010 (EDT)
Hi Geert. Just in case you haven't noticed, the results of the discussion linked above was written into policy at Wikitravel:When to use dates, where you can see more detailed information on where and why (not) to use dates. In case you disagree with that policy, you can start a discussion at Wikitravel talk:When to use dates so more editors can see and join the discussion. But according to the current policy, Claus was perfectly right to remove that datestamp you added, which I'd do myself if I saw it before Claus did. – Vidimian 06:03, 6 October 2010 (EDT)
I did not add that datestamp at all, i was just wondering why it was removed since i personally think it's a very good idea. For a traveller a price without datestamp is worthless. It could be the price of yesterday or the price 10 years ago... but anyway, i did not want to start a discussion about it. I know by now what the usual 4-5 suspects joining these going to make out of it anyway ;-P. Swissbelg 10:18, 6 October 2010 (EDT)
Oops, sorry for not checking the revision history of that article more deeply. – Vidimian 13:46, 6 October 2010 (EDT)
Geert (User:Swissbelg) has already explained that in the edit summary: . If you want your listing to stay at Wikitravel, please take a look at Wikitravel:Listings to see how it should be formatted properly (and don't forget to add vital information such as address, phone number, and price info in addition to web address), and especially please have a read at Wikitravel:Don't tout, and Wikitravel:Welcome, business owners policy pages. – Vidimian 13:36, 22 October 2010 (EDT)
Thanks User:Swissbelg & User:ClausHansen for the info. I have updated the page as per guidelines (please suggest if any changes are required). This is my first wiki artice so apologize for any mistakes. I felt that the article talked only about the budget accommodation in palolem. there is a lot more to palolem. The luxury 5 star resort in Palolem - The Intercontinental, was not at all mentioned in the article. Our resort The Fern Gardenia is a new 3 star resort - for which i have created a listing. WIll try and find all info for the rest of the hotels and add listings. Fair play now? sorry about earlier. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yashvit (talk • contribs) 23 October 2010
Looks OK. I've trimmed and tweaked it a little, though—there were too many "premium"s, which is essentially a meaningless word. – Vidimian 06:01, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
Personally i would call this entry spam removal ;-P. If I alone was making wikitravel policies, only travellers would be allowed to add listings, never ever a business owner. Lucky enough for you I am not, and others seen to be keen on letting you advertise for free in wikitravel, and I will accept this consensus. However there are 2 things still bothering me: first of all I do not consider 6500Rs midrange. Maybe (but only maybe) in switzerland, but definitely not in India. Second is also about the price: for every from there should be a to, end of story. Please add it. Swissbelg 08:51, 24 October 2010 (EDT)
Oh yeah, by the way: tell me how 1) importing wooden cottages from canada and putting airco in it and 2)having a swimming pool next to the beach would be "eco sensitive". you are nothing but yet another profit making chain exploiting tourists and underpaying local workers. Swissbelg 05:38, 28 October 2010 (EDT)
Firstly about the prices - those are rack rates(only used for 10-14 days in a year - common practice in goa). You believing our resort is mid range or not is not a valid reason to change the category of my listing. I think an understanding of market in Goa(especially Palolem Beach) is required to take this decision. Anyways, I will leave it for others to decide. As for the resort being eco-sensitive, the wood used in these prefab cottages is sourced from 100% replenished trees. Kindly read this http://www.ramcons.com/files/6712/7470/3305/TOING_220708.jpg Also the resort does follow EcoSensitive practices such as Sewage water treatment(we have a large STP plant for such a small resort), Waste vermi-composting - further used as manure for our garden. We are also in plans of organizing beach/neighborhood cleanups. If you consider the beach shacks in the area with their non-existent waste disposal/recycling practices, etc then you will understand why we claim to be an eco-sensitive resort. Also may i ask whether you have ever been to Goa - especially Palolem, to have such strong opinions about the place and the article? Yashvit 29 October 2010
OK, compared to the rest you might be a little eco-friendly. But AC is just plain not, and importing wood from canada is not as well. And i wonder what poison you put on the wood to protect it against termites. Prices should display the entire price range and should be high season prices (as in any travelguide btw.), NOT JUST YOUR CHEAPEST OFFER. After playing with your booking engine i corrected your prices again. The 10-14 days you mentioned is just a plain lie. And no i have not been in palolem, i just dont like commercial abuse of wikitravel, and you were unlucky that i randomly patrolled your entry. Not that i don't know southern india, i have been in kerala and several times in tamil nadu, my mom lives in Auroville. Swissbelg 18:34, 28 October 2010 (EDT)
1-Its nearly impossible to live without AC in Goa(crossed 35 degrees in summer) 2-The wood is imported as prefab from China. No worries about adding the to price. The 10-14 days i was talking about is between 22nd dec till 4th jan that is when the rack rates come into play - feel free to play again with our booking engine.Yashvit 29 October 2010
Oh, I thought people have been living there for thousands of years. Maybe i'm wrong ;-). Importing wood from china is not ECO-friendly. Sorry. Swissbelg 07:41, 29 December 2010 (EST)
Greece | Drink water
A lot of bars bring a bottle of water for free with a drink and they are not tourist traps. Also some don't bring you a glass of water, but if you ask for one they will bring you one, and they aren't also tourist traps. You have to find another way to express what you want to say about tourist traps because I can't figure out what you are trying to say about tourist traps. It's better to write that they have to ask if there is extra charge for the water, if they bring them bottled water. Handrian 14:00, 4 January 2011 (EST)
Hi Andreas. I see what you mean, you are right, it can be misunderstood. But i insist that if they bring you a bottle of water without you asking for it, and try to make you pay for it, they are tourist traps. Since you seem to be greek, they of course will not pull that on you, but they do on tourists. I've been hopping around in Greece quite much and it is a fast and easy way to spot them. Unfortunately it happens quite often in touristy areas. What do you think of the following suggestion:
A glass of water is traditionally served with any drink you order; one glass for each drink, especially with any form of coffee. Sometimes you even get a glass of water first an then you are asked what you want to drink! Sometimes you might as well get a bottle instead of just a glass. In touristy areas you might have to ask for a glass of water if you want one. If you don't get water with a coffee you just stepped into a tourist-trap! Also, if you did not explicitly ask for a bottle instead of a glass, and they try to charge you for it you should refuse!
would that be more clear? Swissbelg 16:37, 4 January 2011 (EST)
That's more clear, change it to that one. Handrian 05:33, 5 January 2011 (EST)
Your recent actions have been both unhelpful and arrogant. Three people, of which I am one, have editted the wording of a section. You have consistently reverted these changes. Not only is the version you are insisting less accurate but you appear to consider your opinion superior to other people: 3 other people. It would be better for wikitravel if you accepted that others' opinions are not inferior to yours, and when a number of people are consistent in oppostion to yours then you should accept that your edit shouldn't remain. It is also advisable if you considered the reasons for your belligerence in these actions: is is for the better of wikitravel or is for your personal reasons.
Wow, what a heap of assumptions in one cowardly unsigned text. First of all - please identify yourself, create a login and sign your talks. I have serious doubts about you being more than one person. Second - I temporarely reversed only the part where you took out the humour without changing the content. All others i left intact. Wikitravel is not Wikipedia and a little humour is desirable. Third - I reversed it a second time to the original content, which wasn't written by me in case you assume that, to make you talk about it first, so we can reach a consensus about it before changing. I don't see anything arrogant in that, nor do I consider others opinions inferior to mine. But I do consider anonymous entries inferiour to regular wikitravel users. And last but not least - if you insist changing I propose you make a suggestion on the articles talk page. Swissbelg 20:46, 14 April 2011 (EDT)
Wow, your arrogance shows itself again .. 3 people disagree with you so your conclusion is they are 1 person! How about considering that your opinion is not superior to that of others? Clearly this edit summary  demonstrates that you believe "what I think is correct, everyone else is wrong and therefore what I think should be included."
Another set of useless insults and not one single word of why you think the sentence in question should be changed or what is better about your version. Try to focus on the second part of the sentence "(i don't! create an account and we can talk!)". And speaking about not accepting... whining about it on Texugo's page won't help solving problems either.
"consensus about it before changing" Such as 3 people voting for one version with just you for another .. oh I forgot your opinion is superior to others.
Nobody voted anything. As i stated the second time i reverted your entry: voting we do on talk pages, not by edit wars. I'm still eagerly awaiting the 3 people to show up on the articles talk page.
But how many people equate to you .. 4, or 10, or 30, ore more?
Around 35 people will do.
"But I do consider anonymous entries inferiour to regular wikitravel users. Well it's just as well that you don't set policy, as it's clearly acceptable for unregistered users to contribute. And "anonymous"? As opposed to those from people using a pseudonym?
Feel free to contibute. And my real name is availlable on wikitravel. Feel free to google where to find me if you want to beat me up, but beware of my brother, he's taller than you!
BTW it's very easy to identify that the changes which you chose to ignore and rubbish are from 3 different people: , , .
I don't waste my time to whois every entry. If i see on the IP contibutions pages that there is reason to assume it's the same person sockpuppeting, i assume so until proven otherwise. That's one of the many reasons we prefer regular users. If you're more than one, it should not be a problem to all talk on the talk page, isn't it? Anonymous entry's are always patrolled by regular users btw, at least we try to keep up.
Hello, I just wanted to thank you for the tipping article you posted up, I have been travelling around in so many countries in Europe and will be doing the same in Asia, and I appreciate having all of the information in one place. Cheers! --CanadianJ'ese 16:20, 5 July 2011 (EDT)
Bayswater Car Rental
Hi there. Re this edit, I do agree that this is an interesting independent car hire company. However, they only operate in Sydney and Perth. Therefore their listing ought to be in those city articles, and not in Australia. I have taken it out of the country article for that reason. Cheers. --burmesedays 03:47, 30 August 2011 (EDT)
Hi! I clearly see your point but i have a few remarks. Just some loud thinking.
1. If we remove them there we should add them in sydney and perth...
2. According to this strategy avis, hertz and co should only included in the article "world" ( Personally I would ban all the chains you can find anywhere from wikitravel anyway, but that is another story).
3. Adding them in Australia can help a traveler to decide which entry point in Australia to choose.
I don't think there is a set policy as such on this. Wikitravel_talk:External_links#Car_rental_agencies provides a bit of info. Generally the practice has been that large chains go into a country article. I think there is a place for interesting independent options in city articles. It needs to be kept under control though. --burmesedays 04:56, 30 August 2011 (EDT)
The most recent, comprehensive discussion was at Wikitravel talk:External links#Car rental agencies again, which resulted in the policy you see at Wikitravel:External links: "[Don't link to] Rental cars operators, in cities where they are common (10 or more operating in the city). Typically we don't provide details of national car rental chains in local guides. Providing details at the national level, and mentioning the name and location at local level is sufficient if required." LtPowers 09:48, 30 August 2011 (EDT)
Hi Swissbelg, could you please explain your recent edit to the Adelaide article. Thanks -- felix 09:36, 3 December 2011 (EST)
Hi Felix, sorry about the delay, didn't see it. Yes I can. We were recommended by (multiple) locals not to go there as it is - to cite them - plain crap. When we walked by we had a look at the menu and the only swiss thing there is the prices. It's a tourist-rip-off.