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


From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has Star potential. It’s well written with great information. However, for Star status it needs both to be entirely complete and to perfectly match the Manual of style. If you see how it can be improved, please plunge forward or point it out on the talk page.


Someone showed it to me this week. , ありがとう wikitravelers! 嬉しい!!! Ojousama 03:17, 15 April 2008 (EDT)

どういたしまして。Now 頑張って on the next article! Jpatokal 05:35, 15 April 2008 (EDT)


Can someone look at this thing and see if it's guide material yet? I need a pat on the head or somethin.

Ojousama 22:00, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

I'd call it that. We could turn it into a star if map-making ever catches your fancy. My only complaint is that I'm now embarrassed for having missed so much when I went to Matsuyama! Gorilla Jones 22:28, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
  • touched!* Thanks. Like I said previously, while I have serious ideas for this page (emergency info, tourist information centers, language, festivals....maps!), I'm very unsure whether I'll have the motivation once I leave. We'll see...

Thanks again. Ojousama 07:55, 12 July 2007 (EDT)


It's what my brain is.

Ojousama 02:42, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

AND...what's up with the categorization of Matsuyama? It changes length everyday. Maybe it's a bug. huh.

Oh, and for future generations, I only write this thing at work where there isn't much else to do, so since I'm getting the hell outta here, there's no garantee that it'll go anywhere father than where it stop on Thursday.

Want to write a novel? Become an English teacher in Japan. Sōseki: The First ALT! Ojousama 03:21, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Tiddied up the Dōgo Onsen spiel, but the indent is still gone for the different baths. I wonder if it's the info blurb, but that's too cute to cut (assuming that's what it actually says...I don't like Dōgo enough to patronize and check myself).

Hotels were easy enough. Done. More or less. I'll have to add Hotel Okudōgo and my favorite Love Hotel, Nankai, but It's hard to comment on such things when you live there... Haha, UNLESS you are talking about only Love Hotels...

Added actual crap you should buy under Buy, but "sadly", I'm not sure if I can write info for shops to buy them. It's probably not necessary because of the proliferation of such...crap. :D Granted, the Hime Daruma are darling.

I DREAD doing Eat because I can think of so many places AND that's the other major section I lost a lot of writing on. I threw away my notes, too. f'in piece of sh!t usb drive... I'm almost certain I can just find the info online, but I'd still have to interview staff for some of the info... Can I wing it? Hmmm...

Ojousama 03:16, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

I know you're all attached to your Dogo Onsen spiel, but it needs updating, cleaning up and shortening to fit the format and tone of the rest of the article. Being so concerned about following styles and rules and making it printer-friendly, I'm sure you can understand that.

Ojousama 00:50, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

Go right ahead -- it's actually lifted word for word from an Everything2 entry I wrote back in the days when wikis didn't roam the earth yet. I wouldn't necessarily try to cram it into a single Do block though, because it's kinda big... Jpatokal 01:08, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

I'd like to make sub headings under the Do block, but they end up screwing with the rest of the page.... Bah. Ojousama 02:21, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, putting complex formatting inside listing blocks doesn't really work. Jpatokal 02:33, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

Links to Wikipedia[edit]

One more thing: we don't usually do Wikipedia links for individual attractions or people, it's better to just summarize who/what they are inline. Links don't work too well if you only have a printout! Jpatokal 02:05, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

And who cares about that? "Usually" means just that. Usually. I guess this article will be UNusually convenient for the ignorant. Anyways, I suppose we'll just edit until one of us dies, because I rather like the idea that people who want to know more can simply click and not waste time searching and misspelling important names. Honestly. Why must someone want to take their boredom out at the same time on the same article?

The Wikitravel:Links to Wikipedia guideline cares about that. Remember, one of the goals of Wikitravel is to produce printed travel guides, and just linking to Wikipedia for everything is a) useless offline and b) lazy, because it discourages people from actually describing the thing. What was the last time you saw a Wikipedia link in Lonely Planet? Jpatokal 03:34, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

Forgot about all this. Lonely Planet's a different kind of media... (although I guess you're refering to the website, which I don't use, so I don't know.) Besides, I didn't say I'd link to everything on wiki. If there's a useful page and I find it, of course I'd link to it. Sadly, not many people care to write exclusively about these two (or I haven't found viable online sources). Bah, maybe one day... Ojousama 02:57, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

No, the whole point here is that Wikitravel will also, some day, make the leap to printed guides. This has guided a lot of design decisions on the site: a big one is that we prefer long cohesive articles instead of scattering everything about, and a small one is that we try to avoid excessive links to Wikipedia. Jpatokal 03:26, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
What you're arguing for is to make this article UNusually lacking in information. If there's interesting information that useful to the typical traveler, we want it in the article. That's a lot more convenient than telling people to go find the information for themselves. But if you think this is completely wrong-headed, then I encourage you to make a proposal over on Wikitravel talk:Links to Wikipedia to have this policy changed for all of Wikitravel. I'm not convinced, but if you're able to build a consensus that we should be doing it differently, then you'll have the support of other Wikitravel editors to do not only this article that way, but all of them. - Todd VerBeek 08:12, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

Perhaps that'd be true, if I were to not put info in the following sections. But I did and that's the thing: the Understand part is just a primer, so that's why I didn't see the issue for a link (unless the problem is just that it was a wiki page, to which I respond with *shrug*). If I wrote a novel about a novelist there'd be little to put in the See and Do but addresses and directions. I both linked and explained, but whatever. :p I'm the idiot slaving over this crap. And for what? I don't even use wikitravel.... (and I was feeling quite 'get the hell outta my face' then, so ignore the tone.) Ojousama 02:57, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

You're doing a pretty good job for an idiot. =P And I'm not going to object to WP links for eg. famous authors, because they don't have "official sites" and because you've already explained the basics in the guide. Jpatokal 03:26, 9 July 2007 (EDT)


No, it's not how we name things. Please see Wikitravel:Article naming conventions. Basically, the Matsuyama in Ehime is way better known than the rest, so it gets "Matsuyama" and the rest are "Matsuyama (wherever)". Jpatokal 02:18, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

The point was getting rid of the needless disambiguation. Thanks for taking such an interest. I suppose. As long as people can use it. (Ojousama said that.)


Really nice read. Good work on this article :) Jamboo 18:02, 7 April 2008 (EDT)