Note where the itinerary potential is
== Walking tour ==
So, I'm really pretty unhappy with this walking tour stuff. Can we please break it down to the [[Wikitravel:attraction listings|attraction listings]] format? It might be useful to do an itinerary like [[An afternoon in Melbourne on foot]], or [[A walking tour of Melbourne's Central Business District]], but I don't think this belongs in the main article. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 10:00, 26 Dec 2003 (PST)
:I agree with the principle of what Evan said. A walking tour is really an itinerary. The only thing I'd change is the title -- something like [[Melbourne walking tours]], [[Walks in Melbourne]] or [[Melbourne on foot]]. Such an article could act as a container for several walking tours. [[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 11:03, 26 Dec 2003 (PST)
:Actually, [[Walks in ...]] might be suited for national parks and the like too, eg. [[Walks in Kakadu National Park]]. And this makes me think of having articles like [[Treks in the Himalaya]]... [[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 11:07, 26 Dec 2003 (PST)
::So, I screwed up cos I plunged in before reading [[Wikitravel:attraction listings|attraction listings]]. Then I read [[Wikitravel:attraction listings|attraction listings]] and came back and changed the page. Now I discover that I caused unhappiness. I'm really pretty sorry. Hopefully though the article is better now and people are only a bit unhappy with it, but I had better check it again. :-/ [[User:Nurg|Nurg]] 19:42, 26 Dec 2003 (PST)
:::Sorry to make it sound so harsh! Don't take "unhappy" the wrong way. My only unhappiness is to see good work that needs to get changed.
:::To tell you the truth, I really liked the walking tour, but I think it's best for travellers to have articles in consistent format. It's more painful when the work is good than when it's slapdash. Anyways, I'd love to see the walking tour turned into its own article. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 20:28, 26 Dec 2003 (PST)
==Rail/public transport link==
I have deleted "catch [http://www.railpage.org.au/railmaps/melbourn.htm public transport]" because a. the link isn't working and b. [http://www.victrip.com.au/ VicTrip] seems to be the main public transport site. [[User:188.8.131.52|184.108.40.206]] 21:10, 10 Jan 2004 (EST)
I thought the Nepean Hwy went from Melbourne to [[Mornington Peninsula]] rather than [[Sydney]]. Isn't Princes Hwy the coastal hwy to Sydney?
==That travel guide link==
Hmmm.. I went to that site, and it doesn't look all that bad. I know that I'd rather have its author contributing the actual info to Wikitravel, but what if I go to a bar because the link is on Wikitravel, and then make a writeup about the bar. On the [[Geneva]] page we've left a well meaning but very poorly designed page in the links for some time just in case there's something useful in there (also cause I wanted the guy to think about contributing.) -- [[User:Mark|Mark]] 17:00, 17 Mar 2004 (EST)
:Well, according to [[Wikitravel:external links]], we normally just link to primary sources -- official Web sites for destinations, attractions, restaurants, bars, etc.
:Wikitravel is not a Web directory or link farm. It's a travel guide. I'm not convinced there's a good reason to link to another travel guide from ours. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 18:30, 17 Mar 2004 (EST)