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

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Melbourne"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
m
(rejigged main discussion page, send old discussions to archive)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Walking tour ==
+
[[Talk:Melbourne/Archive 1]]
 
 
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)
 
 
 
If anyone wants to make this itinerary, the place to find the original is [[User:Nurg]]'s revision of 08:49, 26 Dec 2003. -- [[User:Hypatia|Hypatia]] 05:50, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)
 
 
 
==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:202.154.157.115|202.154.157.115]] 21:10, 10 Jan 2004 (EST)
 
 
 
*The actual public transport site for Melbourne is [[http://www.metlink.com.au/ Metlink]]. Victrip is good for around Victoria, however in Melbourne the public transport system is known as, and run by, Metlink.
 
 
 
==Nepean Highway==
 
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)
 
 
 
==Huge city==
 
 
 
I've listed Melbourne as [[Wikitravel:Articles needing attention|needing attention]] because it looks like it's ready to be split into districts. There's already a bunch of sections that are beginning to get district headings: See and Sleep have sort of unofficially been split into districts by their headings. However, I don't know Melbourne well enough to do a split which is: sensible, not too fine-grained (say, 4-8 districts, rather than 30); and comprehensive. -- [[User:Hypatia|Hypatia]] 22:45, 28 Nov 2004 (EST)
 
 
 
== My Travels ==
 
 
 
Hi folks,
 
 
 
I'd like to offer words and pictures from [http://www.anchovy.durge.org/holiday/Oz/30-7.live a few days' travels around Melbourne] to Wikitravel. If there's anything good in there (or in anything else I've put on my site) that fills a hole in Wikitravel, grab it, or give me a shout and I'll rustle something up. You can use all of my [http://www.anchovy.durge.org/holiday/ Travel] stuff under the WikiTravel Creative Commons licence. --[[User:Iain|Iain]] 13:16, 2 Mar 2005 (EST)
 
 
 
==Chapel St==
 
 
 
"While there is some reasonable food on Chapel St, South Yarra, travellers who are not into pretentious phallic symbolism may wish to avoid the place while the local automotive parade is taking place on Friday and Saturday nights (there are more genuine phallic cars in Williamstown on a Sunday afternoon). The clothes here are overpriced."
 
Whilst I concede that this particular quote is both hilariously worded and absolutely true, I don't think it is appropriate for this page.
 
 
 
:Are you aware of our 3-step procedure? 1) Click edit tab. 2) Change the item. 3) Click "save page". --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 17:22, 13 Mar 2005 (EST)
 
::Yes I am, thank you. However, I wanted a concensus before I deleted it outright. Thanks for the great welcome.
 
 
 
:It's an interesting question about WikiTravel's tone. To be honest I kind of like the phrasing; I think it's friendly, informative and offers insight into local culture. Personally, I really appreciate when guidebooks provide a glimpse into the rites and rituals of a city I'm travelling through. My only gripe is that it makes reference to shopping (which should be in the Buy section) and doesn't spell out any of Chapel Streets virtues, of which even its ardent critics admit there are some. How about: "Eclectic  Chapel Street has a wide selection of restaurants and cafes and offers the chance to observe Melbourne's 'beautiful people' at play. Be warned, though, Friday and Saturday nights can turn into a logjam as phallic symbolism takes over and a parade of techno-blaring customised cars perform the young Melbournian ritual of 'Chap-lapping'." [[User:Allyak|Allyak]] 01:58, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)
 
  
 
==Article Division and Downsize==
 
==Article Division and Downsize==
  
 
As per [[User:Hypatia|Hypatia]]'s observations of a year ago, it is - IMHO - time to start revising the main article, dividing and devolving the Melbourne article into its various relevant districts... For a big city, it is amazing that it has survived so long in this form (mind you, [[Chicago]] seems to exhibit the same phenomenon).... The '''See''' section of the main article, for example, has grown quite large and unwieldy - definitely time to identify the highlights of Melbourne's attractions, summarise them, and send the detail to the district pages. Being a native Sydneysider, I don't want to presume too much regarding the city's regions, so maybe several Melburnians can get the ball rolling? [[User:Pjamescowie|Paul James Cowie]] 03:10, 13 Nov 2005 (EST)
 
As per [[User:Hypatia|Hypatia]]'s observations of a year ago, it is - IMHO - time to start revising the main article, dividing and devolving the Melbourne article into its various relevant districts... For a big city, it is amazing that it has survived so long in this form (mind you, [[Chicago]] seems to exhibit the same phenomenon).... The '''See''' section of the main article, for example, has grown quite large and unwieldy - definitely time to identify the highlights of Melbourne's attractions, summarise them, and send the detail to the district pages. Being a native Sydneysider, I don't want to presume too much regarding the city's regions, so maybe several Melburnians can get the ball rolling? [[User:Pjamescowie|Paul James Cowie]] 03:10, 13 Nov 2005 (EST)

Revision as of 08:18, 13 November 2005

Talk:Melbourne/Archive 1

Article Division and Downsize

As per Hypatia's observations of a year ago, it is - IMHO - time to start revising the main article, dividing and devolving the Melbourne article into its various relevant districts... For a big city, it is amazing that it has survived so long in this form (mind you, Chicago seems to exhibit the same phenomenon).... The See section of the main article, for example, has grown quite large and unwieldy - definitely time to identify the highlights of Melbourne's attractions, summarise them, and send the detail to the district pages. Being a native Sydneysider, I don't want to presume too much regarding the city's regions, so maybe several Melburnians can get the ball rolling? Paul James Cowie 03:10, 13 Nov 2005 (EST)