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

User talk:Globe-trotter/Archives 2011

From Wikitravel
Revision as of 14:59, 12 July 2012 by Globe-trotter (talk | contribs) (new archive page)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Khao San Road Map

I have re-uploaded the svg, but there seems to be a problem and I dont know what to do about it. Please try opening it and let me know if it works. • • • Peter (Southwood) Talk 01:37, 10 January 2011 (EST)


Thank you for your edits to my work on the Tryavna entry. RobertSullivan1973 02:35, 14 January 2011 (EST)

Anytime! It's starting to look good :) --globe-trotter 05:51, 14 January 2011 (EST)

DotM Frankfurt

Hi! May i ask you a favour? We are a bit short of nominations for DotM. Frankfurt is a content-wise sound article that was only slushed because it lacked a map. We don't need districts because it is compact enough, airport is within the city limits and trade fair location as well. I would be very welcome and i would take care of the xl mess which is fast done. Thank you very much in advance and best regards, jan 09:46, 18 February 2011 (EST)


Can you comment on Talk:Nyírtass about a merge issue? Thanks! -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:46, 18 March 2011 (EDT)

Food Tours Listing

I was noticed that you remove my contribution on food tours listing. Your reason is the food tour can't not be listed. According to this "Tours can be listed on Wikitravel as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveler could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed." Culinary tour is a new category of travel, just like biking tour, and it constitutes value added to the area. Please advise the different between culinary excursions and biking excursions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

Sorry for your company, as food tours are a fun activity, but the rules are meant to be followed. According to me (and as far as I can judge, the community), a food tour is not a value-added activity. Everyone could buy and try different kinds of Thai food by themselves. In fact, the restaurants listed in the guides already give a good overview. Usually, a bicycle tour would also not be listed, but Bangkok is an exception as you cannot bicycle around the city safely without having a guide (or knowing the area in great detail). --globe-trotter 17:32, 11 June 2011 (EDT)
I respect your judgement since you are an experienced contributor here. However, I think it is very debatable what is value added. Most food tours around the world that I have been to usually bring travelers to restaurants or local eateries that are "not tourist-adjusted". So these tours do support local neighborhoods that most of them are not within reach by most travelers. Furthermore, across wikitravel community, there are a number of food tour listings. I hope standard across community is the same. To name a few I hope this issue is raised to get a wider discussion on the wikitravel community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

Hello. Thanks a lot for bringing the issue to the WT community. Just wonder what is your final thought? I think many people still think that it is OK to list food tours. As one contributor pointed out, we have agreements with vendors. The food served by each vendor are only in sample sizes. Therefore, visitors can try several dish from several vendors (and several food styles) in a single meal. This certainly cannot be done if visitors have limited time to spend (and they cannot order sample size for themselves too). It would be grateful if you can revert. If there is any problem with the content, please feel free to edit.
Yes, I have discussed this with the community on the "Travellers' Pub" page, and it seems like food tours are OK. You can add back your food tours, but they should be listed on the subsequent district pages. It seems like you offer food tours in Yaowarat and in Bang Rak, so you'll have to add them to the Yaowarat and Phahurat page and the Silom page (for Bang Rak). --globe-trotter 07:40, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

time formats revisited

Given your interest in the time formats discussion and/or the star nomination that was almost sidelined over this matter, I thought I should let you know I've reopened the discussion. Hopefully (unlikely perhaps, but hopefully) we can reach a more definitive conclusion on this matter. PerryPlanet Talk 00:45, 23 June 2011 (EDT)


Hi there (with apologies for a cut and paste message). I am trying to muster up some interest again in the now almost moribund Destination of the Month feature. This used to be one of our more dynamic initiatives with lots of debate. Sadly, that is no longer the case. I have made some new nominations to try to get it going again. If you have a moment please pop over there. And some nominations would be good if you can think of any! Thanks. --Burmesedays 10:22, 9 July 2011 (EDT)


Hi Globe-trotter, thanks for your fixes on Eindhoven. Geldrop-Mierlo is 1 municipality nowadays, so "Geldrop (and Mierlo)" doesn't seem right, I guess, and neither is "Geldrop and Mierlo" as I wrote it before. What would be best to do? Just leave out Mierlo all together and refer to the "place" Geldrop rather than the municipality? Thanks, Justme 12:07, 29 July 2011 (EDT)

you welcome. advices ?

Hello Globe-trotter,

That's not many contributions. I would do more if I could but still not very efficient with wikitravel editing while travelling at the same time. I'm doing a Round The World trip, so there will be a lot more update, but if you know some tools links to easier editing online or offline, it would be much welcome.

Thanks also for your contributions. You seem to have done really a LOT ! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Juju22b (talkcontribs)


Hi Globe-trotter. You changed that ispartof-tag on Vaals into ispartofSouthLimburg. Could you perhaps explain what that tag does? I don't seem to see the difference or get the use. Should I place that tag on all the town in this area that I've been filling/creating? Thanks, Justme 11:51, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. It shows the region the article is placed under. Under the title of the article (Vaals), it gives a breadcrumb trail showing its underlying regions. If the IsPartOf is missing or wrong, the breadcrumb trail does not show up correctly :) --globe-trotter 14:36, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Siam Center

OMG, how did I manage to do that...:) --- felix 17:27, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

No prob :D --globe-trotter 17:51, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks your message

I posted my opinion on "Ikebukuro discussion". kambayashi 06:30, 16 August 2011 (EDT)


Hi! I've been working on The Netherlands and its main destinations a bit and I was wondering what you think are the main priorities for that guide? I thought it would be nice if we could bring it at least to usable level? Looking at the guidelines, I would say we're getting close, but I'm not quite sure. Cheers, Justme 09:09, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

At a quick glance I would say that the 9 linked cities and 9 linked ODs should all be usable, and then the country guide definitely would be. The rest is all there.--Burmesedays 10:41, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

The Country guide status page states the following to make it usable: "Has links to the country's major cities and other destinations (usable status or better), a valid regional structure, and a Get in section describing all of the typical ways to get there. Information about the country's currency, language, cuisine, and culture is included. At least the most prominent attraction is identified with directions."
We made it ourselves a lot harder to include regions in the "Other destinations" list, as that means we'll have to get all those regions up to usable status instead of just the destinations! ;-). To get a region usable, it states it "Has links to the region's major cities and other destinations (the most important of which must be at usable status or better), and a Get in section describing all of the typical ways to get there. The most prominent attractions are identified with directions." I don't know what we'd do with the Frisian Lakes, but I guess it should also be a region someday. So to get the Netherlands usable, we must get the following destinations to usable:
District Status Missing
Amsterdam Usable
Delft Usable

Groningen Usable

The Hague Usable

Leiden Usable

Maastricht Usable

Nijmegen Usable

Rotterdam Guide
Utrecht Usable

Efteling Usable

Hoge Veluwe National Park Usable

Lisse Usable

Kinderdijk Outline

Emmeloord Outline

Maybe rename this one Noordoostpolder?

South Limburg Usable

Texel Outline

Waterland and Zaan Region Outline

Will be boosted to usable if the following destinations are usable:

Broek in Waterland Outline

Edam Outline

Marken Outline

Monnickendam Outline

Purmerend Outline

Not sure if this one should be considered as "important", as its not really a tourist destination

Volendam Outline
Zaandam Outline
Zaanse Schans Outline
Frisian Lakes Outline

This region still has to be created (see [1]). Will be boosted to usable if the following destinations are usable:

Bolsward Outline

IJlst Outline

Hindeloopen Outline
Joure Outline
Lemmer Outline
Sneek Outline
Sloten Outline
Stavoren Outline
Workum Outline

So still quite some work left I guess. --globe-trotter 10:52, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

Crikey..... you have whole regions as Other destinations? Not sure that is desirable. It does happen a bit in countries where a region is also an island, but you might want to look at that again for the Netherlands--Burmesedays 10:59, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Wow, quite an extensive reply, thanks :-) However, now I'm confused. If I look at other countries that have usable status, say Belgium for example, many have a bunch of "other destinations" that aren't even close to usable. That led me to the conclusion that the main ones should be usable, not all. I wouldn't want to define the Frysian Lakes as a region in that sense, especially not if that would keep the main article further from usable status. I suggested it as a tourist destination for its water sports facilities, and it does have a few interesting towns. However, it doesn't make sense to me that full articles for places like Sloten (650 inhabitants) or Workum (4000), which might not even be mentioned in other guides due to their limited importance for travelers, should be a condition for a usable article for the Netherlands?
As for the regions, in principle I'm in favor here, as in our small country regions like South Limburg or the Zaanstreek really are commonly considered as "one destination" and tourist information materials are structured in that way. With Hoge Veluwe as an exception, national parks are not even known to the general public. Justme 11:11, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
If you find mistakes like Belgium, please change the status of the article, leaving an edit note explaining why.
On regions, I thought we had a guidelines that a top level region should not also be listed as an Other destination in a country article? I might be dreaming though as I can't find it....--Burmesedays 11:17, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Regions as ODs makes sense for the Netherlands I think, and there are many countries where this happens as well (like Krabi Province is an OD in Thailand and the Loire Valley in France). The difference between an island and a region is in a way artifical, as an island is also a region. None of the regions listed under OD in the Netherlands are top-level regions.
About the Frisian Lakes, that was just my interpretation of it, I am not sure how else to define it. The Frisian Lakes region in a sense is similar to South Limburg, except that the latter region is much better developed on Wikitravel. We could also maybe cramp the Frisian Lakes into one destination article, though it sounds like it could have a lot of content and span a very large area.
Oh, and about Belgium, that one is just wrong. It should be downgraded to outline. It does not even have 9 ODs listed, and many of those listed are outline destinations. --globe-trotter 11:23, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
All good on the regions then. Just one important point to understand - no country has to show 9 ODs. The wording at Wikitravel:Country article template is pretty clear on that: Sometimes a country has destinations that aren't really cities; for example, large national parks like the Grand Canyon, or archaeological sites like Angkor Wat. These should usually be listed on the region page for the region they're in, but for especially prominent ones you can also list them separately here, with descriptions, if they exist. Otherwise, leave out this section. --Burmesedays 11:30, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
I understand they are not necessarily required. But Belgium has 11 million inhabitants, it should easily be able to boast 9 ODs. --globe-trotter 11:37, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

Right. I suggest we leave the Frysian lakes out of the equation then, for now. I'll add its sports activities under the Do-section, does that make sense? Then we can always look into the need/desirability of that region later. I don't think it compares to South Limburg very well, as that is an official and much referred to region, highly more developed in terms of tourism. As far as I know, the Frysian Lakes in daily life are rather used in senses like: "i'm going sailing on the Frysian Lakes this week". But I'm not 100% sure either.
As for the Belgian mistake: that explains then, but it does mean we have a bunch of other countries with usable status that don't meet those criteria. A quick survey of the first 5 [2] shows me that Andorra, Bulgaria, Bosnia, China can't meet the criteria you would set for the Netherland above.. Justme 11:44, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Yes, all those countries should all be downgraded to outline. The Netherlands is quite far in development, except for regions listed as ODs. We could turn the Frisian Lakes into an article, but then we'd still have to develop the most important destinations in the Waterland and Zaan Region (which would at least include those villages I mentioned, although Purmerend probably could be left out). --globe-trotter 11:53, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Anyone who notices an incorrect article status should just please just change it. Little attention is paid to these until we get to the top of the status list.--Burmesedays 12:04, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
I will downgrade some of those countries that don't fit the criteria. About the Frisian Lakes, there are three options:
  • Describe them in the Do section of Friesland, this means that all "important" destinations in Friesland would need to be usable, which would be a hard task to complete.
  • Make them a region, which means we'd need to make the "important" destinations in that region usable (I selected a few large towns and the towns of the Elfstedentocht in the table above, but it'd be up for debate I guess). Probably even harder to complete.
  • We could turn the Frisian Lakes into an article. Easier to do though its a bit odd as at least some towns deserve their own articles I think (notably Sneek).

--globe-trotter 12:09, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm not sure what the best option is. The cheese market in Alkmaar might be much more popular, especially with foreigners, but personally I'd prefer a sailing trip in Friesland over it. Again though, I think we should not be creating situations in which the guidelines lead to unlogical or unreasonable criteria. Personally, I'd prefer a consensus that something like the Frysian Lakes don't have to meet the full usuable criteria for the Netherlands guide to be usable. It just doesn't make any sense to demand full guides for villages I, as a Dutch person, have never even heard of, for the country article to be just usable. If we can't make an exception, then I think we should either make a simple article out of it or replace it with another "other destination". In any cast, perhaps I should have put my question on the talk page of the article. Feel free to move it there, if you want. A copy of the table would be useful there in any cast. I'll try to find some more statistics and info later. Justme 13:07, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

Moved discussion to Talk:Netherlands.

My enthusiasm for this whole site has been send to the bottom today. I have no intention of putting more time and effort into any article, just to see it nominated for deletion within 15 minutes, and only for reasons of "guidelines". I get the need for structure and I applaud all the work that has been put into organizing all the content here, but I feel that the small regular crowd tends to care more for rules and guidelines than cooperation and good travel info. That nomination of the Delta works, to me, is not only wrong in terms of content, but also discouraging and rude. It may be true that that's nothing personal and "just the way it works here", but that's only more wrong and calls for a critical look on common practice. Personally, I think the Netherlands as an article is very usable to any traveller, so I would be more than comfortable if you'd just leave out that 9th one for the time being, and would upgrade the article (with some minor tweaks perhaps). It would set a usable status minimum for any other destination to be added, but that's more than reasonable. I'll leave it to you, though, sorry. Thanks for working with me! Justme 16:29, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Considering how much praise you've received for your hard work in recent weeks, I would encourage you not to let one minor incident get you down. A deletion nomination is not a death sentence; trust in consensus to reach the right decision, and remember that nothing on a wiki is irreversible. LtPowers 17:04, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Answer from Hrcolyer

All these years present, and still no welcome message. I have fixed that now :) Good luck in using Wikitravel and thanks for your edits! --globe-trotter 18:25, 28 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks! Tend to be more of a user really, but do occasionally try and beef up the articles on places I know... Hrcolyer 18:42, 28 August 2011 (EDT)

Thailand See and Do

Well done with that! I know from my attempts at Indonesia, that it is not easy. --burmesedays 23:58, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks! I am still thinking about writing a section on natural scenery, but I'm a bit out of ideas now :) --globe-trotter 00:02, 31 August 2011 (EDT)


Hello Globetrotter,

I am contacting you more or less at random because I want to talk something over with you. The reasons for this are that you seem to take an interest in several pages I have edited and others that I took a look at for comparisson and that I think you are Dutch (as am I). I have added 'Cafe Cremers' to the Den Haag page. Seeing as it is a coffee shop where everybody can drink and smoke it is unique, but it seemed fun to designate it as a coffee shop, for our tourists. We are famous for it, mind, but there are no mentions of them on any of the pages I have compared with. So, I made a subsection under 'drink' and dubbed it 'smoke'. I think it is a great idea feel we might wish to add such a section to the pages of every major Dutch city. That way the tourists will not get stuck in that place where everbody gets treated rudely, but go to the shop where everybody dances like Iggy Pop (if you know what I mean). Do you think this is a great idea as I do, or do you think I should remove the subsection? Thanks for the input. --Faust 21:58, 2 September 2011 (EDT)

Hey Faust! It is perfectly fine to add coffeeshops to Dutch cities, they are major places to visit in Dutch nightlife. At the The Hague page, the Smoke section currently seems a top-level section. As you have stated, I think it'd be better to have the Smoke section (or "Coffeeshops" section as its called in Amsterdam) listed under the Drink section. That way all nightlife facilities are grouped under Drink, while coffeeshops are easily grouped in their own section. So yes, a great idea overall, keep adding your favorite listings! :) --globe-trotter 22:49, 2 September 2011 (EDT)
Thanks Globetrotter, that was sort of what I was going for, but I am not all that experienced, so it turned out as a top-level section. I'll edit (if you have not yet done so). --Faust 05:51, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Could you look it over to see if it lives up to standards? I imagine people will add other later (I quit the habit 10 years ago, but I enjoy this shop for the athmosphere and one can drink there as well). --Faust 06:00, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, it's well done! The only thing is that it's better to use the [add listing] button on the right of the section, as then you can just fill in the gaps. Also keep in mind that Scheveningen has a separate article. --globe-trotter 10:55, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
I am unsure why I added the blue white studio to te hague. I did know it was in scheveningen... Funny how the mind works. Other than that, I just added most when I created the sub-sections, so I never aw the button. But thanks for the tips and the thumbs up! Maybe I'll see you around at the Rijswijk page. :) --Faust 11:02, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
By the way, Should we not name the top-section something like consume or something? Drink is such a strange name for stuff that can be smoked and all.. --Faust 11:06, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, "Drink" is a bit odd, as it includes cafes, nightlife, clubs, coffeeshops, and many other varieties of nightlife. But well, while the name is a bit odd, it's quite a logical grouping I guess. --globe-trotter 11:29, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Ok, to your health then! --Faust 16:05, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


Hi Globe-trotter. Are we okay to upgrade Celle to guide status? This would appear to be normally a criterion for DOTM articles? Regards. --SaxonWarrior 07:56, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

It's not only a guide, it's a strong one. I commented on this recently at /Talk:Celle#Status_of_this_article. --burmesedays 08:16, 5 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, it's definitely guide status :) --globe-trotter 12:53, 5 September 2011 (EDT)


What happened there? My browser was showing the big map as duplicated, and the "<!--PRINT PRINT-->" code looked like something we wouldn't want there. Did I delete the only copy of the big map? Ikan Kekek 03:32, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

Those PRINT tags are crucial for Wikitravel Press guides. Without that line, the map would not show up in the printed guide. The reason the map showed up as duplicated before, was because the user adding the tour broke the print tag. --globe-trotter 03:49, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Wikitravel press guides? People in the press use these guides as printouts? Ikan Kekek 04:23, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Well, not people in the press. But Wikitravel articles are sold as commercial guides, yes. See [3]. --globe-trotter 06:28, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
I can't imagine why there would be much market for that, when you can just print out pages yourself from any printer connected to any computer. But whatever works. Ikan Kekek 10:09, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
See Wikitravel:Wikitravel Press. People buy them because it's a lot easier than printing them out yourself, and it looks a lot better. And see Wikitravel:Template index#Print formatting for other things you shouldn't remove. =) LtPowers 10:15, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Indeed. I have one here (although I must say it was a gift). It looks a lot better and I also find such a nice little booklet more convenient than a pile of home-made copies. But then again, that probably depends on your printer and binding facilities hehe.. Justme 10:21, 13 September 2011 (EDT)


I am wondering why you bumped Lombok down to outline? I think this is one of the better 2nd level region articles anywhere at WT, and definitely usable. The 3rd level region articles below it are decent enough. I do not think the presence of red-linked speculative city articles should effect any of that. --burmesedays 08:10, 26 September 2011 (EDT)

Yes it's definitely usable. I saw it guide, and saw it did not file the criteria for it, as many towns do not have established articles. So I just downgraded it to outline, while instead I should have downgraded it to usable. --globe-trotter 11:58, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
The question is whether Praya, Selond, and Sekotong count as "the region's major cities" for Central and East Lombok and South Lombok respectively. Regions can have usable status without having every sub-destination be usable. --Peter Talk 17:47, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
Praya is a regional town, it is the capital 'city' of the Regency of Central Lombok and has a population of around 55,000, one of it's most notable aspects is that it has an ATM. It is also the nearest town to the new airport. Sekotong is hardly a city at any stretch of the imagination, more a loose collection of villages. Selong is not on the map of Lombok for a reason, it is little more than a village, it is however the capital of east Lombok, its most notable feature is that it is nearby the east coast of the island. Have a look using Google earth and it will all become clear. Technically they are significant as they are the Regency capitals but the reality is that we would be really scratching to make an article for any of them, maybe Praya and that is on my list of things to have a look at. Maybe if some accom and restaurants start happening in support of the new airport we might have something to build on, until then probably not.-- felix 03:09, 19 October 2011 (EDT)


Hi, any idea how that table was causing the problem? Also, just curious, how did you work out it was the table? Cheers. -- felix 07:35, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

I am not sure why, that's why I removed the complete table (else I would have fixed it). I found it was the table by going through the article and checking many different things that could be causing the issue. --globe-trotter 08:54, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
Hi, I finaly got around to it and fixed the table, I recall you might have deleted similar tables elsewhere but I cannot recall where. I cannot seem to dig out any clues from you contrib histories...any recollection? --felix 02:35, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
I have not removed a lot of tables. The only other one I can think of is Kuala Lumpur. --globe-trotter 03:22, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Thonglor midtown

Thonglor midtown is no more, all the businesses are gone, and the name has been removed from the building. No idea what will happen next. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nk (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the info! I've already updated the map accordingly. --globe-trotter 05:11, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Huge cities

Hi, G-t. Can I ask why you've moved the functionality of Template:Huge into Template:PrintDistricts? LtPowers 09:27, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

I've been incorporating it into that template, because the articles exactly overlap. This way the {{huge}} tag is not necessary anymore. --globe-trotter 09:51, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
New York City doesn't use Template:PrintDistricts. LtPowers 17:11, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
Shouldn't it? --Peter Talk 19:56, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
I replaced it some time ago with a custom message because (three of) its constituent boroughs are themselves huge cities. LtPowers 08:48, 14 October 2011 (EDT)
Yes, I hadn't seen New York City was an exception! I've added [[Category:Huge city articles]] to the New York City article to make sure it shows up in the list. --globe-trotter 08:59, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

Ko Lipe

Hi, Globe-trotter. First, I just want to acknowledge all the great work you do. You spend a lot of time cleaning up articles and working to improve formatting, and I tip my hat to you.

About Ko Lipe, I don't understand why you don't want Castaway Divers to list freediving among their services. My feeling is, as long as it's all in one listing and isn't touty, it's fine for them to mention every service they have (at least within reason). Also, he's right about Elephant Books & Coffee, even if he pointed out the "inconsistency" in an annoying way, as if it's intentional on anyone's part and he has to be passive-aggressive instead of just deleting the multiple entries he saw.

If you don't hear from me for a while, it's because I went to sleep and then worked all day tomorrow.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek 05:08, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

I am not against the listing, it's just that it was placed as being "freediving" itself [4], while I think it should be placed as a separate listing after an overview of freediving is given. --globe-trotter 05:13, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
I got and agreed with that part. By the way, it looks like Castaway Divers is both a "Do" and a "Sleep" in the latest version of the Ko Lipe guide, and that should not be the case. Ikan Kekek 21:12, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
sorry if I came across as passive-aggressive, didn't mean too, had already read rules about other owners not editing competitors listings, just felt a bit peeved as didn't understand, the rules regarding two listings. really had no intention of touting, just wanted to add info about a service we provide, once I understood the two listings logic I add the service to the dive operations section as it is offered through the dive centre.
Now though I feel penalized, as you have removed my dive companies listing, that's is a legitimately separate business, from the resort, it is a separately list Ltd, it has it's own website, and has it's own management and although on the same beach it has its own building beach being over 2km long.
would love to add more info about the island general, and sorry if I make mistakes in where I place the info in advance,if you would like me to write the intro to Freediving would love too. think I understand now how you guys would like it mentioned, it is an interesting sport and would add to pages interest Pierre drake 00:28, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
Of course, I had no way of knowing Castaway Divers and Castaway Resort were two different businesses; instead, they look for all the world like divisions of the same business. Assuming that they really are two separate entities, as you state: Speaking for myself, and not for Globe-trotter, my only problem with your latest edits, in that case, is that your reference to your business in the section explaining what Freediving is smacks of being promotional, because even though I take it that you are in fact the only freediving shop in Ko Lipe, you really shouldn't be referring people to your listing there - that gives you three different references within one guide, and really pulls the guidelines on listings to the breaking point. And for that reason, I'm deleting that reference in that place. But with all that said, I appreciate your willingness to cooperate and help make the guide better - that's the most important thing. All the best, Ikan Kekek 03:41, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
no problem try to keep all reference out of the equation, how do you suggest, people find the location of any particular activity would say (check dive operators out for course) be OK.. thus tourist would then know where to find further info without some reference kind of like shooting in the dark? Re: Maps etc., would you like me to make one up, a lot of work involved but think I might have time over x-mass to try and do one? would love to add some photo's but read alot about load times etc. how do you guy's feel about some more picture's, if yes how many which sections etc? Pierre drake 09:26, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
They can just search the page for more mentions of freediving. It's not hard for them to find if they're interested. I'd like to hear Globe-trotter's opinion, but my feeling is, good maps and good, non-promotional photos always add value to a guide. And I would also say that it would be fine and indeed helpful to show the locations of different dive shops, hotels and whatnot in the maps. Ikan Kekek 09:41, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
I agree with Ikan that the description of the activity should be separate from that of the business. People can still find your business as it is listed right under it, and you can put in the description that you offer freediving. It's a bit of a slippery slope, but for now I accept that they are two separate listings, as long as they are in different buildings. Please provide addresses for both listings (oddly enough, I can't find them on the websites). I appreciate the other edits you've made to the article, and would be great if you could further improve it with a map. --globe-trotter 03:18, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
OK Re:Listing understand, Re location of all the Shops businesses here on the island, it is hard for you guys to imagine, without every coming here but basically we are such as small island a long way from any where, the island has no roads, or address, people here, use things like trees to describe where they are or how to find things, so basically if you are on a beach that is 2Km long we just say we are toward the south end of XY beach, or you jump in a boat and tell the boat drive you want to go to XY resort or dive shop or Bar the locals no where everything so they get dropped in the right location. the only thing close to a road is a path that is 1.5mtr wide that runs from one beach over the middle of the island to the other but that's really it the rest are just sandy paths weaving here and there across the island that often get move or changed because of some development or another. so re our address we just tell people we are toward the south end of sunrise beach, not very accurate but all people have to do is walk in that direction until they find what they are looking for. Try to knock a Map up over x-mass, and will load some nice non-promotional photos. all the best Pierre drake 06:21, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
Thanks for that explanation; I understand. And thanks very much in advance for the map and photos!
All the best,
Ikan Kekek 17:45, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Where you can stick it

Hi, G-t. It would be really helpful if, when you add something to Wikitravel:Where you can stick it, you also mirrored that new addition in the "By section" section of the page. Thanks! LtPowers 17:31, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

Ah, hadn't noticed that section, will do so next time!--globe-trotter 09:48, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

removing isPartOf


I just thought I'd point out that (even though it isn't used very much) in order for RDF to work correctly, isPartOf is required on district articles, even though it isn't required for the breadcrumbs. See Template:IsPartOf. I'm sure there is probably a policy to the contrary somewhere else saying it isn't required, but the RDF is definitely wrong if it isn't there. --inas 23:56, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

Ah, I did not know about this. The template doesn't have the IsPartOf tag. --globe-trotter 03:21, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
Yes, great things were anticipated for RDF, but at this point I can't ever see anything coming from it. The way the software uses RDF for breadcrumbs, but not for subpages is a bug, and I think I logged a tech request some years ago. Some background is here [5] if you are interested. --inas 18:48, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Koh Lipe: castaway


sorry if I came across as passive-aggressive, didn't mean too, had already read rules about other owners not editing competitors listings, just felt a bit peeved as didn't understand, the rules regarding two listings. really had no intention of touting, just wanted to add info about a service we provide, once I understood the two listings logic I add the service to the dive operations section as it is offered through the dive centre.

Now though I feel penalized, as you have removed my dive companies listing, that's is a legitimately separate business, from the resort, it is a separately list Ltd, it has it's own website, and has it's own management and although on the same beach it has its own building beach being over 2km long.

would love to add more info about the island general, and sorry if I make mistakes in where I place the info in advance,if you would like me to write the intro to Freediving would love too. think I understand now how you guys would like it mentioned, it is an interesting sport and would add to pages interest. Pierre drake 00:31, 18 October 2011 (EDT)


Hi Globe-trotter. User:TourismMadang looks like a legitimate user page to me - on Wikitravel:Don't tout the policy specifically requests tourism professionals to identify themselves on their user pages, and that seems to be what the user is doing. I've restored it for now as I'm concerned that deleting the page without comment might chase this user away, but let's discuss if you feel differently. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:42, 9 November 2011 (EST)

Because of the weblinks, e-mail address, and the spammy/touty tone, I thought it should be deleted. However, now I read it back and I understand what you mean. I guess I was a bit quick with deleting, so just keep it up. --Globe-trotter 20:53, 9 November 2011 (EST)


Hi, thanks for your message! :) Jakeseems 19:15, 13 November 2011 (EST)

No problem :-) It was a breeze to read through Hong Kong in a day, quite similar to the things I have seen there. --Globe-trotter 19:17, 13 November 2011 (EST)


Hello! Please check this page.[6]

there is link to other site .

Should I fix this page? kambayashi 22:50, 14 November 2011 (EST)

Yes, please remove the link, as it does not comply with our external links policy. :-) --Globe-trotter 23:22, 14 November 2011 (EST)

My edits

I have had two reverted edits and I don't know why so i'am just wondering if you think I should continue plunging forward or not? For right now i would like to continue editing. --Kcv5 03:30, 21 November 2011 (EST)

SL map

Do you perchance remember what your source was for your Sierra Leone SVG? --Peter Talk 17:35, 25 December 2011 (EST)

Woops, seems like something went wrong with uploading it! I've added the source information from the PNG file to it. --Globe-trotter 02:51, 26 December 2011 (EST)