The center for all Wikitravel images!

Talk:Carnival Elation

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

I do not think that creating Carnival Elation is necessary. But write it and then we can comment on it. In other words Prove it to me. -- Huttite 17:40, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)

  • I figured someone would say that, you where quick about that. It is its own city. Also I would like to put it on the Galveston page but the page is still not working. --Texas Web Scout 17:55, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
It is looking interesting so far.... But something under 900 feet (~300 m) long is not much bigger than a large building. I suppose it counts as a remote attraction or resort, so could be worthy of an article. I assume a major reason for the ship existing is that it has a floating casino that operates outside the 12 mile limit.
From the experince I had on this ship, the casino was kind of popular, but not a popular as you would expect. All of the live shows very popular, infact it was hard to find a seat.
Re the broken Galveston page. - See Galveston (Texas). It is an acceptable alternative page name and I can edit it, see if you can. To link to it use [[Galveston (Texas)|]] and it will show as Galveston. -- Huttite 21:00, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)

Is this working out, or Delete?[edit]

So this article was supposed to be a test case regarding how to handle Cruise Lines. Personally, the article looks about the same as a high-end hotel description. And we don't do articles per hotel or per hotel chain. So I'm inclined toward nominating this for deletion, but would anyone care to defend the article first? To clarify, I think this could be a short, one paragraph 'get out' entry for each port of call or something, but that's about it. (Or should it be one paragraph get out for Galveston, but Get in/By ship on the ports of call?). -- Colin 19:25, 27 Feb 2005 (EST)

  • At this stage the article has had but one major contributor, who is now inactive. I am inclined to leave it here as an example for others. It looks like it has potential as another way of seeing travel but I do think it requires more than one serious contributor. -- Huttite 20:55, 5 Mar 2005 (EST)

Lionfish's thoughts[edit]

  • IMO I don't think it should be deleted. Although this isn't the sort of holiday I'd go on, it does describe a form of travelling, of sorts... Hmm, it seems a slippery slope to start deleting things like this.
  • People do describe guest houses and hotels. But the difference here is the point of the trip is the hotel... if that makes sense.
  • In general I don't think things should be deleted unless there's something really wrong with them. The worst case is noone ever comes here, and this remains unused.
  • Maybe we could have a 'cruise liner' page to put them all on?

Ben's Thoughts[edit]

  • Hello all I am back, I have been in the process of moving to Death Valley, CA. I have not been able to work on this page. But I will work on it now. Please give me a chance.
As Huttite points out, waiting a bit and seeing how this experiment works out could be a good thing. And it takes time for us to get eyeballs on the page -- it doesn't need to just be you. In fact, it would be interesting to see what happens if others contribute their additions to the article. So I won't interfere with this experiment this year. Welcome back! I'll be in Death Valle three or four weeks from now... how were the wildflowers? I heard they were suposed to be unusual this year. -- Colin 03:11, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Vfd discussion[edit]

Ditto. ~ 02:09, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

Outcome for the above three: Kept for now; discussion also archived at Talk:Cruise ships. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 21:36, 30 May 2007 (EDT)