YOU CAN EDIT THIS PAGE! Just click any blue "Edit" link and start writing!

Talk:Luxembourg (Belgium)

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

Luxembourg (Belgium) restoration[edit]

(The first two comments below have been copied from Ttcf's user talk page)

Thanks for putting my edits back, I didn't understand why they'd been undone either:) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ruben Alexander (talkcontribs) • 01:03, 11 April 2014‎ (UTC)

User:Ibrshao does terrific work combating vandalism and touting here, but in this case I have the strong suspicion, from looking at your other contributions, that you are quite knowledgeable about Belgium and should be allowed a few days to develop your ideas further. If, after a week or so, your ideas have not further developed or there is a consensus that they are not useful for travellers then we may have to think again.
Meanwhile, you may want to look at Wikitravel:Region article template which says:
"Regions are somewhat nebulous organizational groupings we use on Wikitravel to organize all the many cities in a country into some kind of navigable and comprehensible hierarchy. They can be sub-national political territories, like Minnesota or New South Wales, or more nebulous "tourist" regions like Normandy, or the American Southwest. Region articles tend to be more "soft", discussing the people, culture, climate, and cuisine in the region, rather than the legalistic stuff that's in a country article, or the addresses-and-phone-numbers stuff that's in a city article.
Before you plunge forward creating a region, keep in mind that we only add a new level of regions when there are too many cities or too much content in the existing breakdown. The regional hierarchy at Wikitravel doesn't always follow the official breakdown—and frequently is much "flatter" than the official breakdown." --Ttcf (talk) 23:27, 10 April 2014 (EDT)
Ok thanks for your reply. I'll do my best to continue adding information to the different pages, though it might take a longer than a week to finish.
I chose to present the in the structure I used (listing the regions within the provinces and the provinces within the regions) for the following reasons:
- Belgium is made up of a large number of regions that often cover parts of more than one province, and some times cross into other countries. Allthough the country is small, these regions all have distinct characters (culture, landscape, architecture, climate, and even language), that mostly have more in common with other parts of the region in other provinces/countries than they do with other parts of the same province.
In other words: The Ardennes are the Ardennes, the Gaume is the Gaume and the Famenne is the Famenne, and understanding this is essential for travelers to know what to expect when visiting a specific region, and placing towns in these subdivisions makes it easier for them to imagine the town in its real context.
- Provinces are often mainly administrational subdivisions, though this means that a number of things that are important to travelers (such as bus-transport and cycle paths) are clustered by province.
- Also, IMO, having a seperate list of regions, towns and other attractions is a lot clearer than having a list of towns + a list of other attractions that contains museums, monuments villages and regions.
- IMO part of Belgium's character comes from the fact that it is a transitional country, with areas in neighbouring countries having a part Belgian feeling: i.e. French/Belgian Lorraine, French/Belgian/Luxembourgish Ardennes, French/Belgian Hainaut, Flanders/French Flanders/Zeelandic Flanders, Walloon/Flemish/Dutch (North) Brabant, Dutch/Belgian Limburg etc.
I would like to add that I only provide descriptions of places that I have visited and have some knowledge of. I will list places that I know exist and are visited by others, in the hope that other users will eventualy fill it in.
I hope you guys agree? Ruben Alexander (talk) 06:28, 11 April 2014 (EDT)