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

Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel:Star nominations"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 275: Line 275:
: → [[Wikitravel:Star nominations/Slush pile#Teaching English]] [[User:Jpatokal|Jpatokal]] 09:23, 15 November 2008 (EST)
: → [[Wikitravel:Star nominations/Slush pile#Teaching English]] [[User:Jpatokal|Jpatokal]] 09:23, 15 November 2008 (EST)
::Yes I know, but per request via talk page, it was asked to bring this back.  Keep smiling, [[User:Edmontonenthusiast|<font color="#339989">ee</font>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Edmontonenthusiast|<font color="#8848d7">talk</font>]]</small></sup> 12:25, 15 November 2008 (EST).
==Nominations to remove Star status==
==Nominations to remove Star status==

Revision as of 17:29, 15 November 2008

This is where we determine whether an article is ready for be classified as Star status. Even though the criteria are fairly objective, it's good to get some additional eyes to look over a page and confirm that it's ready before elevating it to Star. For reference, here's the general description, from Wikitravel:Article status:

The article is essentially complete. It meets all of the above criteria. It follows the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule. Prose is not only near-perfect grammatically but also tight, effective, and enjoyable. It has appropriate illustrations, such as photos and a map. Enough breadth and depth of material is presented that anyone familiar with the subject of the article would have little to point out as absent. Future changes to this kind of article would reflect changes in the subject (e.g. a museum closes, a hotel price changes, a new airport is built) more than they'd require improvements in the coverage.

Objective criteria for Star status varies depending on the kind of article it is. For more concrete guidance on this, see:

If you feel that an article currently at Star status is no longer worthy, or never was to begin with, this is also the place to nominate to de-star an article.


Star articles: Last minute checklist

  • The article must be complete — See definition above.
  • Grammar and spelling must be perfect — See definition above. Prose should be stylistically superior and effective.
  • Illustration: the article should be appropriately illustrated with pictures and a Wikitravel-style map, with all attractions marked.
  • Listings should be in alphabetical order — geographical order is also acceptable if it is deemed better.
  • No duplications: a listing should appear under one section only — if there is ambiguity, put it under the section that it most applies to.
  • Time and date formats: Use: M,Tu,W,Th,F,Sa,Su; "...daily" not "Daily..."; "midnight and noon" not "12AM and 12PM"; "AM PM" not "am pm". (Examples: "M-F noon-11PM" and "9AM-9PM daily").
  • Section introductions are not mandatory but should be present when they serve to improve a section.
  • Use "—" (mdash) for breaks in thought.
  • Use abbreviations for addresses, e.g., St, Ave, Ln, Blvd.

You can nominate any "guide" quality article you think is ready to be declared a "star". Please do not nominate an article if you know that it falls short of the criterion above — refer to the info box for a last minute checklist. If there are other nominations on this page, add yours to the bottom of the list. The basic format of a nomination is as follows:

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for, plus a swell kitchen sink. ~~~~

Having done this, please replace the {{guide...}} tag with


at the bottom of the nominated article. You also need to post a note at the Wikitravel:Travellers' Pub to publicize your nomination — remember to tell people that partial critiques and even just a few quick words of support are welcome. These steps help draw attention to the article's nomination, improving the discussion as to whether it should be awarded star status.


Please comment on whether you agree that the nominated article is ready, with a bullet point (*) and your signed opinion. If you think it's ready, a simple "Support" will do. If not, explain what you think is missing or not up to standards. You don't have to leave a detailed critique to vote on the star — partial critiques are welcome, and feel free to just voice your support for the hard work someone else has done.

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for, plus a swell kitchen sink.  TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (EDT)
* The sink isn't properly formatted, and there are no "budget" places to sleep. ~~~~

After three weeks of discussion, if a consensus is reached, then that an article becomes a star. Note that a consensus means that all outstanding objections should have been addressed and dropped; if issues remain then the discussion should either continue or, if they cannot or will not be addressed in reasonable time, the article should be added to the slush pile.

Nominations for Star status

For an archive of previous successful nominations please see Wikitravel:Star nominations/Archives.

Walt Disney World Resort

This article is very deserving of being a Star article. All of the sections are teeming with helpful information. User:Jonathan_784 9/4/2008

  • Comment: At first glance this article looks really impressive. Since we have never gone through this process for a non-city, non-park destination, this will be tricky. I'll read through it within a couple days (hopefully) and get back to you on this. Hopefully we can get some real discussion going on this article. --Peter Talk 17:34, 4 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Not quite there. My biggest problem with the article as it stands right now is that almost none of the listings follow our MoS. Most of the hotels listed do not have contact info, prices, location info, or any of the stuff that is required under our MoS, and the descriptions sound like they were pulled directly from the Disney website. The same goes for everything in the Eat and Buy sections. Now, granted we are talking about a theme park, so perhaps we can't get them to perfectly fit the MoS, but I feel like we can do better than this. PerryPlanet 12:04, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Quick Critique: I gave this a 15 min speed read and...
  • Pros: I think overall this article is very good. Some of its sections seem really "Stay safe." To its credit, it also makes use of things like info boxes, pictures, and warning boxes, and overall it seems pretty well formatted.
  • Cons: I agree with PerryPlanet above — most of the listings are incomplete per MoS. Also, most of them are not in alphabetical order. Not all addresses are abbreviated...e.g. uses "Street" not "St." The "Sleep" section on the map appears to be done well, but only six "See" and "Do" items are mapped, and none of the other sections are there at all? Also, in the "Read" section (and ostensibly throughout the article) it does mention a lot of other travel that standard? I would like to see a complete article here so that no further referral was necessary. It would be better perhaps to see more info on the "information centers" that were only passively mentioned. It would be nice to see them marked on the map as well. I wonder would a "Contact" section be appropriate here?
  • Decision: Good job, well done, but I think there is a lot of tidying up work left. Asterix 14:30, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Okay, here is what I think: User:Jonathan_784 9/5/08

  • About the "Read" section: discuss this with the person who wrote that (User:LtPowers). But seriously, I think that section is helpful.
  • The Disney-branded hotels share a common reservations number (1-407-WDISNEY), and I have not been able to locate any individual addresses and phone numbers, so are those really necessary?
  • None of the shops or restaurants have contact information. That is fine as long as we know just their locations.
  • If you can, please make any adjustments as necessary, and I or anyone else can try to duplicate.

Per your request:
  • Disney's Caribbean Beach Resort, 900 Cayman Wy (off E Buena Vista Dr), +1 407 934-3400 (fax: +1 407 934-3288), [1]. checkin: 3PM; checkout: 11AM. Enjoy the ambiance of the tropics in one of five "Island Villages." $134-$184.
Asterix 17:27, 5 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Update: I have adjusted all the hotel listings to the best of my knowledge. I would appreciate it if you could plunge forward and add anything I may have missed.
  • Another update: I put all the Sleep listings in alphabetical order. Please redo the map to reflect the change, and expand its name to Walt Disney World Resort or just Walt Disney World - that is the name of the article, and it's cited in the infobox under "Understand."
I agree that this approaches star quality. I also had concerns about the "Read" section when Lt first put it in. His reasoning was that we would never cover in detail as well as the referenced sources. *shrug*. All hotels have phone numbers and all attractions have locations. I am concerned that we don't even describe locations e.g. "east side of park" "to the left of the main entrance".. whatever. I guess if we don't do that, perhaps the Read section is truly necessary. I don't like rushing to Star... it implies there's nothing left to do. OldPine 13:54, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Another update: I redid the Buy section, but I know somehow that it isn't "complete" yet - please plunge forward.
User: LtPowers has voiced a concern over the "Buy" section. Please focus on this section
I haven't read through carefully yet, but this does look like a great article. But I'd be tempted to hold up the "starrification" until we have WT style maps of each park, with all attractions marked. --Peter Talk 14:41, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
Use this link to create the maps: -- User:Jonathan_784
I wasn't volunteering ;) And those maps are all copyrighted. --Peter Talk 20:28, 6 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Another update: The Magic Kingdom subsection now covers all the attractions! Let's finish all the others. User:Jonathan_784

On closer inspection, and based upon the last few comments, I now also think that we should hold off on starification. Articles are supposed to be at star level before they get onto this page. To my knowledge this page is for possible minor tweaks and fine tuning. It's clear now that the articles "completeness" cannot be verified, and there are also several more maps to be made -- no mean feat! There was also a question raised above about the source of the material that does not seem to have been addressed. Asterix 16:25, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

9/7/08 - I have finished the overhaul of the See and Do section, to the best of my ability. The Eat and Buy sections are now the only ones that need attention. But I'm at a loss as to what should be done - maybe all of you can help. No need to rush, let's at least make this a Star-quality article, if not Star itself. User:Jonathan_784

9/9/08 - After reviewing the Eat and Buy sections in several other Star articles, I think I may have a working knowledge of how to finally "finish" this article. It's going to take some time, though. Update 9/10/08: I have finally completed the expansion of the subsections that were in need of attention. Unless anyone says so otherwise, I will re-boot this nomination by erasing this discussion. User:Jonathan_784

First, please never delete discussions; they should always be archived, and in this case should be archived in the nominations slush pile. Second, I do object to this article being made a star as long as it lacks maps that show the locations of all attractions. The satellite data is available, and a map trace is eminently possible. It's also a pretty clear requirement for all non-region star nominations to have all listed attractions/restaurants/etc. marked on a Wikitravel-style map. It's nonetheless a great article, but it lacks the "perfect" quality of a star. There should be no notable room for improvement in an article if we are to make it a star. --Peter Talk 18:10, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
One other optional suggestion: it would be nice to have some more images, since the article is so long. They help break up the black & whiteness of the page. And I'd guess there are a lot of good photos of Disney World floating around! --Peter Talk 23:16, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
Just added 2 more pictures. User:Jonathan_784 9/11/08 9:52 CDT

9/16/08: After reviewing a few Star articles that have only one map, I think that this article is definitely Star quality, with or without maps of sub-areas such as the theme parks. User:Jonathan_784

  • Object. I don't think this article is ready for star status. I'm not even going to nitpick, I have one major underlying criticism of this article - lack of descriptions in the listings. Some Eat and Sleep listings do not have any descriptions at all, and those that do read like they were pulled directly from a Disney website. Honestly, looking at it the only differences I can tell between the listings are theme, location, and price. That's not good enough for me. I need something more specific - what makes this place worth staying or eating at? What are the highlights? Stuff like that. As it is right now, I can't support promoting this one to star status. PerryPlanet 19:08, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Geez, I didn't even know this was up for star, or I would have been contributing to the discussion. Gotta do a better job communicating, Jonathan, especially on the talk page. A few items:
    1. I understand Peter's suggestion of park maps, but I question their value. To me, "The Magic Kingdom" is the attraction, so a map of it would be an attraction map, not even a city map. It'd be like having a map of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. -- and equally subject to frequent changes. I can see other perspectives though -- certainly a visitor to WDW makes extensive use of park maps, so I can understand why we might want them here (although I daresay Disney does a much, much better job of producing them than we ever could).
    2. The "Read" section can go if necessary. I don't fully understand the purpose of the "Read" section, because it's not really described anywhere, so I did what I could. I will point out, though, that some of those sources go into much greater detail than we generally do --, for example, has detailed menus for the restaurants on property, something we would never try to keep up-to-date.
    3. Jonathan's prolific efforts on this article are deserving of recognition and accolades, although I agree the article isn't star-level yet. I still need to take a detailed look at the current state to see exactly what I feel needs changing; a lot of my earlier visions for the article have been made moot by Jonathan's efforts, and I do still have that unresolved question on the talk page.
  • -- LtPowers 09:29, 17 September 2008 (EDT)

This discussion seems to have stalled, so I'm bringing it back up. I just made a quick trip to the public library to take a look at Fodor's Walt Disney World -- here are my new thoughts:

  • Fodor's book not only has maps of the theme parks but also of the resorts. It would probably not be worth such an effort to have theme park maps, or resort maps, for that matter.
  • I wrote many of the restaurant descriptions myself, and I'm not a culinary critic. The way I see it, the restaurant descriptions are decent enough provided that the external links lead to some more specific info.
  • For the hotel listings that don't have descriptions, I think they're allright with just the contact info and the links. These are ordinary, non-themed hotels anyway.

Jonathan 784 14:49, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

Objections Jonathan, I really commend your efforts, and I think it'll get there eventually - but for now I have the following objections;
  1. The layout of the page is a mess (I have a very untypical resolution of 1680x1050, it may not be obvious to you if you're on a low res setting ) - this refers to the info boxes in particular.
  2. No, I really think a place needs maps over the attractions, with the same underlying reasons as the external links guidelines (we want the content here). And I know that other star articles might just have one map, but this is a different sort of article and destination all together - try it - it's not that freighting once you get into it :-)
  3. There are still a lot of listings that don't have descriptions - this is a must as far as I'm concerned, and others could use further elaborations (I recommend doing them one section at the time, until you feel really good about the section, and then moving on to the next one)
I feel you frustrations dude, I digged headlong into Copenhagen myself, without realizing how much work it takes just to get the districts into guide standard. Just take it one section at the time, and try not to rush it too much. Ganbatte kudasai! ;-)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sertmann (talkcontribs)
While I don't deny that park maps are useful, I question whether it's practical to keep them updated. See my comparison above -- it'd be useful to have a map of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., but not really practical. LtPowers 22:34, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
Hmm. The reason we don't keep up maps of museums is because they provide their own maps at the door for free. If they don't, then I think a map would be quite handy (like at the Hermitage, for example). So, are the Disney maps free? --Peter Talk 22:52, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
Oh yes, due to their essential nature. Disney gives them away by the bucketful. You get the full suite of maps/guides at check-in, or with your tickets if you're not staying on-site. I can't imagine anyone choosing to use our maps while actually in the park, no matter how good they are.
That said, there may be some value in a potential visitor using our maps to plan his or her visit. When the idea of park maps was first floated, I was thinking of maps as detailed as a city map would be. However, now that I think about it, a basic map of each park, showing the major themed areas (the seven "lands" in the Magic Kingdom, each pavilion in Epcot, etc.) and major landmarks might be worthwhile, and not as hard to keep up-to-date as a map showing every last ride, restaurant, and show. I still don't think I'd let their absence keep the article from becoming a star, but I wouldn't object to their inclusion either. LtPowers 08:57, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
That was how i was thinking, mainly locations of the different rides - anyway, I've s striked it under my objections, even though i'd really like to see it Sertmann 10:29, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I would like to see that. I made a National Mall map that basically set out to do the same thing (although I doubt Disney World would have quite so many attractions on one map!). I'd like to see these before calling it a star—while the guide is awesome even without them, it's not quite as perfect as our criteria require (the criterion that there be no ostensible room for improvement). And given my geography bent I really like to see the lay of the land before arriving. I think these maps would be pretty easy to do, since NASA provides really close up images of the parks, and because you could use the Disney maps (or just experience) as a guide in marking the landmarks/major rides.
So in sum, I'd like to see these basic maps before I strike my objection. Once we've got them up, I'll take a closer read through the article before I support. --Peter Talk 12:13, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
Looks fine to me! Edmontonenthusiast 23:22, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
So what is holding this back from being a star:updated list? Keep smiling, ee talk 16:18, 13 November 2008 (EST).

I think it's time to add this to the slush pile. I don't think the prose is sparkling yet, and Peter still wants park maps, which will take a while. I'm working on an Epcot-area map but I'm not sure how it's going to come out using our house style (due to the way Disney uses stagecraft and illusion to influence the guests' perceptions, an aerial view of the parks does not mesh well with what the guest perceives). Furthermore, given our goals to be comprehensive and the only travel guide a traveler would need for a given destination, that means our Walt Disney World travel guide needs to be book-length. All the other Disney World travel guides are. For us, that's going to mean dividing up into "districts", possibly on the scale of individual lands (i.e., a "Fantasyland" article, a "Future World" article, a "Camp Minnie-Mickey" article, etc.).

In short, I think we need to have a discussion about what exactly our WDW article should include, and how big it should be. This is not the place for that discussion, though, so I would encourage anyone who commented here to join me on Talk:Walt Disney World Resort for tea and cookies a discussion on the scope of this article. A lot of interesting points were raised above, but we need to discuss them there, not here.

-- LtPowers 11:06, 15 November 2008 (EST)


This article is the most developed article in the Caucus region and is quite through in its detail of sights, places to stay, and even some cultural insight to the city.

  • Support. I've already critiqued this article on the article talk page and had my concerns addressed—I think it's ready for a star. I'd be happy to hear other critiques though, if they are forthcoming! If this one makes it, we'll get to add a new section to the Wikitravel:Star articles page for the Caucasus! Anyway, User:Cupcakecommander has done some terrific work with this one, making a truly complete guide to a city for which no other real guides exist, and which is a lovely travel destination—easily one of my favorites in Eastern Europe. --Peter Talk 10:12, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Almost Support - There is only one thing I think should still be fixed. Prices below 1 AZN is given both with (0.5 AZN) and without (.5 AZN) the leading 0. For uniformity and to ensure that one does not accidentally read 5 AZN for .5 AZN, I would suggest that they all be change to include the leading 0. --Nick 13:45, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
Done. --Peter Talk 13:49, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Almost support. Wow, what an interesting place! If this becomes a star it'll be fantastic, as we don't have any from this region of the world. After a long scan though, I found some nitpicky issues I thought should be addressed:
  • Most of the listings that have hours lack days. For instance, is this place open daily, or just a few days of the week?
  • The Handicrafts under Buy is not marked on the map.
  • There's an infobox for Eliehmed Confectioneries, but should it just be its own listing? And if so, it should be marked on the map if possible.
  • There's two eat listings marked on the map which have no mention in the article, as far as I could tell: Milli Yemeklar and the Turkish Bakery.
  • The Kerpish Restaurant, Laziz Restaurant, Cold Spring/Soyuk Bulagh Restaurant, and Sheki Saray Hotel Restaurant lack prices.
  • One of the hotels is spelled Shail Pansinot in the article, but Sahil Pansinot on the map.
  • Finally, none of the hotels have check-in/check-out times. But then again, I don't know if its customary for hotels to have that in this part of the world. PerryPlanet 14:11, 10 September 2008 (EDT) PerryPlanet, I'm pretty sure postings are supposed to go in sequential order??? Asterix 15:43, 10 September 2008 (EDT)

You'd think they would, but when I was editing the page the only edit conflict I had was with Peter's reply to the guy above me. I didn't even see yours until I was finished editing the page. Don't ask me... PerryPlanet 19:14, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
You're right, there are definitely a few map updates missing—thanks for catching these! I'll try and get a hold of Josh to help me locate the confectioneries listing on the map. I think I stayed at one place in the Caucasus that had a check-out time, but didn't encounter any here. Anyway, we haven't been including that in the criteria for star articles, and I'm not sure I'd want to change that. When you call the hotel or arrive there, they'll tell you themselves! And I agree that the confectioneries should be listingified, but I'll need Josh to do that, since I don't have an address. --Peter Talk 22:04, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Some Objections: I like this article, it seems like a really simple and quaint place. Overall I think it’s great, I like the abundance of pictures which really compliment the text. Mostly just some MoS issues for me…
  • Listings are not in alphabetical order.
  • Not all the listings are on the map
  • It would be nice I think to get more specific with some listings, like in the “Drink Section”… to give the names and addresses of specific cafes etc.
  • Throughout the article it uses the 24 hour clock, which I prefer, but is this standard on WT? Also, it lists 10:00 instead of 10 etc.
  • How much is entry to the Drama Theater? Also, how much do the guided tours cost?
  • It would nice to have hours in the “Buy” section, even for the Bazaars.
  • In “Eat” section, average prices or price ranges for regional specialties would be good and there are some prices missing for a few restaurants there.
  • I notice that some of the phone/fax numbers are missing the ‘994’ prefix...I think I saw 944 in there as well. Also lengths of phone no's differs somewhat...might want to check that.
  • Is there anything else that could be added to the “Cope” section…like publications etc?
  • As per verbage in the “Contact” section, it would be nice to more than one post office marked on the map.
  • Caravansarai is mentioned in “See” and “Sleep” which eschews the “no duplications rule." Also their phone no’s are different?
  • I don’t know does it apply as much here, but any info on check in and out times in “Sleep?”
  • I don’t think that all of the sections need introductions but perhaps it would help to add a few? For example, imo “Eat” could use one, as could “Sleep” and “See”
  • Not sure about touting the bottled water as ”healthy” so much especially with environmental concerns about bottling water etc
  • Abbreviations for address needed…St not Street etc.
  • ’T’ used instead of ‘Tu’ per time and date format.

Sorry about the long list; most of them would probably not stop it becoming a star but I think that some would. If I catch anything else later I’ll let you know. Well done on a great job. Asterix 14:01, 10 September 2008 (EDT)

I talked with Josh about the teahouses quite a bit, and our agreement eventually was that there are no real differences between the teahouses (same tea, same men milling about), they have no phone numbers to call, and they're all over the place—they'd be hard not to find. So we decided to leave individual listings for them out of the article. If someone is looking for one, they'd probably only have to walk a few steps, but they could also check the map for the ones located close to tourist areas.
We're still sort of debating whether to use the 24 hour clock for destinations that use it (that is, all posted schedules in Azerbaijan are in the 24 hour format), but I don't think that should hold up a star nomination anyway--as long as the article is internally consistent.
For the drama theater & guided tour prices, my guess is that they vary wildly, but I'll try and get Josh to comment on that.
Regarding the Caravansarai, I'm not sure that there is a better way to display the information. It's the second biggest attraction in the city, but is also perhaps the best hotel option as well. I've taken out the (incorrect) contact information in the see entry and linked directly to the sleep entry, where you can find the contact info. Hopefully that will resolve this problem, as well as it can be.
And regarding the bottled water, the natural mineral waters in these parts are supposed to have all sorts of health benefits, and are safe from parasites, so I think that's what that is referring to.
I'll make sure to get all the map issues fixed too. --Peter Talk 22:49, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support Though i agree with the above comment, that listing should be on the map of possible Sertmann 13:23, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Almost support. I think it looks pretty good and pretty darn close... once all the above concerns are addressed, I'll support. Definitely hours should be formatted correctly, and also phone #'s should all start with +994 – cacahuate talk
I'm still working on some of the above concerns, but wanted to document that I've taken care of both the hours and phone numbers. --Peter Talk 23:11, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Just wanted to jump in and let any potential slushers know not to slush this discussion. Hopefully I'll get some help from User:Cupcakecommander, but I'm committed to getting the above issues resolved and getting a nice star on this Caucasian article. Just a matter of time. --Peter Talk 01:17, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

OK, I think I've done all that I'm inclined to do. I've stricken the objections/suggestions that have been taken care of. The ones that remain, I've tried to address in that longer comment just above. What's the process for making this a star now? Nick and Asterix have both stopped contributing here, so they won't be able to reverse their earlier positions... --Peter Talk 17:30, 11 November 2008 (EST)
It's looking much better now...I'm rather confused about the Handicrafts listing though. It looks like it's labeled "Handicapped Association" on the map, but then under the Shebeke listing, you have the "Handicraft Association headquarters at 85 Vidadi St", which is different than the "18 A. Cabrayilov St" given under the Handicrafts listing. So I'm definitely rather bewildered on that one. But other than that it looks fine. I fully Support now. PerryPlanet 00:26, 12 November 2008 (EST)


I don't know if it's bad style, nominating your own article or not, but I've picked up on Elgaard's excellent work, on this district (where we both live). Fixed the map, MoS'ed it, and added everything I felt was missing. Neither of us are native speakers, so there might be an issue there, otherwise i feel like it's essentially a complete piece of work. Sertmann 14:11, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Support. It's a great work of a district article, with a nice map, and is all properly formatted as far as I can tell. And please feel free to nominate your own articles—I think the nominator is almost always the author. Just a couple suggestions:
1) Short introductions for see, do, and eat would be nice.
2) Adding a contact section to the map key, and numbering the contact icons would be really useful, since otherwise most readers won't recognize what those black contact symbols are
3) Are the cope listings on the map? I saw the H symbol, which I assume was the hospital, but I wasn't sure about the other two. Maybe there's a way to make this more clear?
The last one, the Laundromat Café, i'm not really sure how to mark that (symbol wise) - any ideas? Sertmann 04:58, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
You could perhaps create an ad hoc symbol for each of the cope listings, like a green triangle with a number inside. Otherwise you could try and make a washing machine symbol, but I'm not going to try to do that myself ;) --Peter Talk 17:42, 11 November 2008 (EST)
Also watch those hours formats, I changed them, e.g., M-Sa:noon-5PM,Su:noon-6PM → M-Sa noon-5PM, Su noon-6PM. Anyway, fantastic work, and I look forward to seeing more on Copenhagen! --Peter Talk 18:56, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. Also agree that short introductions to each section would be nice, but otherwise this looks good! Nice work – cacahuate talk 00:27, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support. It looks like a lovely guide, with nice pictures and a great map. In addition to the concerns raised by Peter above, I have a couple of my own:
1) The Sleep section has one listing which doesn't appear on the map, Copenhagen B&B, while the map shows two sleep listings which don't seem to be in the article: Sleep-in Copenhagen and Charlottehaven.
Fixed that, except Copenhagen B&B, doesn't want their address public, but give out the address once people have a confirmed booking, i think that should be respected, without having to remove the listing Sertmann 04:58, 28 October 2008 (EDT)
2) The Buy section feels a little small. Obviously, I've never been to Copenhagen and don't know the extent of the shopping scene, but if there are many small stores like it says in the intro to the Buy section, perhaps we could stick just a few more in? This is not a major concern of mine, though. Just a minor nitpick.
3) Another minor nitpick which has absolutely nothing to stop the article from becoming a Star: the 4 pictures in the See section feel a little too clustered together, perhaps we could spread them throughout the See section? For instance, putting the picture of The Little Mermaid Statue next to the listing for The little Mermaid Statue. PerryPlanet 11:44, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Support - Why? Because I know there has been a lot of work put into it and I looked at it, and I actually learned lots from it, it is well written, and definately deserves it. SO YES! Edmontonenthusiast 19:56, 23 October 2008 (EDT)Edmontonenthusiast
To add, I believe everything has been met that's been brought up and it's been a 3 weeks. Should this not be a star? Happy first day of snow in Edmonton, ee talk 14:59, 11 November 2008 (EST).
There are still outstanding objections to fix:
1) need a suggestion on how to add the laundromat cafe to the map (symbol wise)
2) There's still some introductions to left to write to the sections, and I'm out of idea's on how/what to write, that would be of "star" quality
3) Need to figure out a solution to the image problem (which is darn hard as I'm on a wide resolution screen, and it all looked good to me - tried changing it, and it's all a big mess on my computer now)
4) Have to take a walk around the neighborhood to find some more good stores to add (as I don't want to add something, just for the sake of adding it)
So it's sorta on hold until I get some inspiration to resolve the above issues - the current plan is to "finish" Copenhagen/Christianshavn and Copenhagen/Northern suburbs to guide status, as this is where my idea's to develop the guide are at the moment, and then revisit this, before i continue with the other districts Sertmann 15:48, 11 November 2008 (EST)
Al right, keep up the good work! Happy first day of snow in Edmonton, ee talk 15:54, 11 November 2008 (EST).


Don't quite know if it's "there", but if you give a list of WHERE to improve, I will fix it. I've worked on it extensively and was the first district I worked on after Edmonton districting! I put a lot of effort into it and tried to put in the most complete listings, unlike others and I just hope it doesn't suck. Is it there, or where are the improvements? I'd love for this to be star! Keep smiling, ee talk 18:31, 13 November 2008 (EST).

  • Not yet. Looks like the article is coming along quite nicely, but it's still pretty far from the star's "perfection" requirement. Just at a very quick first glance: not all listings are "listingified", not all establishments have hours listed, almost no price ranges given for restaurants, hours formatting is often incorrect, sections should have quick introductory paragraphs. I'd encourage you to slush this nomination for now (since articles shouldn't really be nominated until they are star quality) and take a good look at existing star articles (like this one) and look over the Wikitravel:Manual of style to get an idea of how to achieve the requisite formatting "perfection." --Peter Talk 18:59, 13 November 2008 (EST)
I'll leave on for some more opinions, plus I'll do the stuff you said over the next couple days, so there's no point in like redoing in 2 days from now. I'll just leave it. But thankyou. Keep smiling, ee talk 19:01, 13 November 2008 (EST).
To add, doncha think by MIDRANGE,'d get the pricing? Or do you mean like average price for a dish is 30$, etc.? Keep smiling, ee talk 19:05, 13 November 2008 (EST).
I agree, many listings needs expansion, and some are really incomplete (I even spotted a few missing addresses), section introductions are lacking (i'd especially like to see some in the do subsections), the listings are not in alphabetical order, etc. It IS great work, and Edmonton coverage is expanding at a mind blowing pace, but it's not a star yet. There is a reason why there are so few of them, even though this place has been going for a good number of years - it takes extraordinary dedication to get articles up there (just take a look at the Disney world nomination above. So i'd suggest you slush this for now, read through the star articles, and get to work expanding the article so you can renominate it later --Stefan (sertmann) Talk 13:32, 14 November 2008 (EST)
Well this sucks! Keep smiling, ee talk 15:46, 14 November 2008 (EST).
This can be added to the slush pile. But expect a come back (I hope!)!!! Keep smiling ,ee talk 19:37, 14 November 2008 (EST).

Teaching English

This article I looked over and looks gosh darn good! Would be our first travel topic star! Thoughts-can it make it? Keep smiling, ee talk 13:03, 14 November 2008 (EST).

Wikitravel:Star nominations/Slush pile#Teaching English Jpatokal 09:23, 15 November 2008 (EST)
Yes I know, but per request via talk page, it was asked to bring this back. Keep smiling, ee talk 12:25, 15 November 2008 (EST).

Nominations to remove Star status

Whenever possible, articles should be fixed rather than "de-starred". Only nominate articles which cannot be easily elevated/restored to "star" quality. Replace the Star status tag on the article with {{destarnomination}}. Vote "Star" or "Not Star".

Failed nominations

See Wikitravel:Star nominations/Slush pile for nominations that failed or were withdrawn. Articles should only be renominated when they address criticisms from the previous nomination. Please add the {{starpotential}} to the top of the article's discussion page.