Talk:Andaman and Nicobar Islands

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Target OTBP[edit]

The way this is shaping up, this could be a great Off-the beaten path destination for next winter! It will be a first for India. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 05:49, 17 October 2006 (EDT)

The formatting is bad right now though. The list of major islands (7-9) should be restored, sights in Port Blair should go into Port Blair, and "See/Do" should just highlight (with links to detailed articles) the best things to see/do. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:53, 17 October 2006 (EDT)
I totally agree, I was struggling with the formatting, still new at this... but please don't revert, we can clean it up shortly... a lot of the basic info that was here before my new updates was random... i'm trying to at least get it into groups that are actual islands, things that are in port blair, and things that are around port blair... give me another day or so then go to town on moving it around! and yes, OTBP! I want to give people info but am also scared to encourage TOO much because it isn't prepared for it yet. When I was there earlier this year I had to sleep in a hammock for 3 nights before I could even find a hut to sleep in... and it still feels really special and the locals aren't jaded, so encouraging mass tourism like Goa is yucky... but you should totally go... hehe... (WT-en) Cacahuate 06:15, 17 October 2006 (EDT)

Length of permits[edit]

Moved out from the article:

Update: in April/May 2009 the maximum allowed stay was 30 days, not 45. Visitors arriving without a return ticket were given a permit for 15 days, which could be extended to 30 days upon presentation of a ticket to the mainland. However, May also proved to be a busy time with mainlanders flying home and islanders going away on holiday, and air tickets were nearly impossible to come by. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 61.11.71.121 (talk • contribs)

This sounds like it may have been an exception, has anyone else run into problems with getting the usual 30 day permit, which is extendable to 45 days? Was this a random fluke, or does it apply to everyone without a return ticket? – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 03:34, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
Dunno, our return tickets weren't even checked. However, we wrote our (booked) return flight date on the permit application, and thus received only a six-day permit — would have been wiser to write in a later date. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:51, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

Rutland Island[edit]

I edited out some of this information in order to make the "Other destinations" section a series of 1-liner listings, but there is no article about this island, so here is the listing as it was, so we can decide what to do with info like the fact that there's a resort on the island.

  • Rutland Island, is pristine, non-polluted and least visited island. Beautiful Mangrove forest and coral reefs welcomes you to the 274 km2 island. There is also a 45 acre Totani Resort which has quaint little huts which can be used as a base camp for exploring the island. It is the ideal place for eco-tourists. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coco Islands[edit]

  • Coco Islands was listed as an Other destination - It is part of the geographical chain for the Andaman and Nicobar Islands but does not belong to India. It was given to Myanmar in the mid-fifties then China took control recently. I removed it from the list. - Matroc (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why does Coco Islands redirect to Southern Myanmar? That seems problematic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because the 499-byte Special:PermaLink/3500624 had no useful travel content in it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for just noticing your reply. My further comment is that's not a good reason. If the islands are controlled by China, why do we want to redirect them to any part of Myanmar? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, no need to apologise :-). If the islands are controlled by China, should we just delete it (by listing it on WV:VFD, ofc)? And is it Chinese de facto control or have they outright annexed it? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Matroc, if you're around, let us know if you have current information about the status of these islands. I will say, though, what matters for our purposes is what country effectively controls them, not whether they annexed them or not. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to article on Andaman and Nicobar Islands[edit]

If my edits were "redundant," why is the same information recited both inside and AFTER the warning box? Qdiderette (talk) 00:19, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regionalisation[edit]

I think the cities and islands in the article should be grouped into regions like North and Middle Andaman, South Andaman and Nicobar Islands. I think I'll plunge forward to do it. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 14:25, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As you like, but are you manually editing categories again? If you are, please don't do that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'm not seeing enough content for it to be clear why we should regionalize this island chain. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although the number of cities are fewer than seven, the number of islands are exceeding the 7±2 rule. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not by that much, though. What would be gained by having the articles you propose to create? Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are fifteen bluelinked articles (plus some redlinked/redirected islands and parks), which exceedingly violates our 7±2 rule, which is a benchmark for our regionalisation. I have divided the islands into three regions on the line of administrative districts, as it is the only possible way to regionalise them. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your statement is contradicting the statement at Wikivoyage:Region categories, "This is unfortunately a manual process. On clicking on the Create category link you will be taken to an edit box with preloaded text. You need to replace the comment text inside the {{isPartOf}} with the parent region of the category." Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Sbb1413 here. We've never used HotCat here and using it doesn't make sense. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413: the sub-region articles you created were just forces of the information in this article, so they didn't serve any purpose. I have started to clean this article up by removing and places without articles. Are there other places that are less important and should be listed only in the subregion articles? Can you provide additional information to make the sub-region articles more useful than they are now? Ground Zero (talk) 19:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove places without articles, as they might encourage readers to create articles on those places. Excluding those places, we have six destinations in North and Middle Andaman with articles and nine destinations in South Andaman with articles. Nicobar Islands is a rural area without destination articles. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 02:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of the places in the North and Middle Andaman, South Andaman and Nicobar Islands sub-region pages were also listed in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands main page. In other words, the sub-regions provided no additional information. The places I removed from the main page are all listed in the sub-region pages. My first thought was just to remove the sub-region pages, because the reader could access all of the information in the main page, but then I saw above that you had put a lot of work into creating them. Which makes more sense: split the information between the main and sub-region pages, or merge it all back into the main page? Having the same information repeated does not make any sense for the reader. Ground Zero (talk) 02:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Split the information between the main and sub-region pages. When I split the Andaman and Nicobar Islands into subregions, I didn't cut down the listings in the main article and I left it for other contributors. Feel free to cut down the number of listings in the main article per WV:7±2, as I'm busy in real life right now. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 03:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the region articles are of much use now, as there is no additional information compared to the main article (I assume). The best solution until there is something to say about the subregions is to use the large region template, i.e. to introduce subheadings in the main region article but not create subregions proper.
The listed cities are 3+2+0, the listed islands 5+7+0 and the listed national parks are 1+6+2. Divided by subregion those lists are very much manageable.
Some destinations without articles have been removed from the lists. To my understanding info on places without articles can be placed in the region article, unless there is some more suitable place. I don't understand why the info was removed, but I haven't checked what actually happened. Would the additional list items make the lists too long?
–LPfi (talk) 08:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm not sure if region articles with almost all-empty sections are very helpful, as it stands right now. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 08:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413: this highlights the problem of starting a project and then expecting someone else to finish it. No-one else seems to be comfortable doing this. I understand that you are busy in real life now, and that must be your priority. As no-one else is stepping forward to complete, this, do you agree that we should merge the regions back in? The text that you created for the subregions can be commented out so that it wowing still be there of you decide to complete this project some time in the future. Ground Zero (talk) 02:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North Sentinel Island[edit]

Since the island is listed at next-to-impossible destinations, should I list at here, despite almost no traveller will ever visit the island? Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's already mentioned in the article as being illegal to visit because the locals really don't like visitors; what else needs to be said? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of adding the island as a listing, as described in Wikivoyage:One-liner listings. However, I was wondering whether I should add that like this, considering its inaccessibility. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't list it. We don't want people to get killed or to introduce diseases that could wipe out the population. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:24, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you for clarification. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:26, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Though North Sentinel Island should probably redirect to South Andaman. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, to wherever we discuss the island. I think it is a bit confusing that it isn't listed among the islands; as we do tell about it, I don't know why we should hide it. If we add a listing, the one-liner should point to the discussion and include a note on it being off limits (perhaps having a light-grey marker for it instead of the standard one). The way to actually go there is to have your own vessel or to charter one. In the former case, going there by mistake seems more likely than somebody going there on purpose, and the company going on purpose can certainly use the coords from Wikipedia. In the latter, not listing the island may make it more easy for some local to take you to another island, claiming it to be the right one. While I am not convinced either way about the ethical aspects of that scam, I don't think it is important for us to hinder it. Also, if we cannot list it here, we probably shouldn't list it on the other page, but just tell about "some islands" in the discussion on non-contacted tribes. –LPfi (talk) 09:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But can we list it if it fails to pass the Wikivoyage:Illegal activities policy? The Andaman and Nicobar Islands Regulation (1956) ensures a 5-kilometre isolate zone around the island, and realistically, no local that has a boat will ever use their boat to venture out onto North Sentinel Island unless they want to get themself killed. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:09, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how listing it as a non-destination would contradict the policy – if it does, why is it listed in the other article? I hope no local would use their boat in such a way, but they could be desperate, hope that they aren't seen, and send the foreigners off in a dinghy (to that island or to an uninhabited other one). –LPfi (talk) 11:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Languages[edit]

Nicobar Islands says that "Nicobarese is the mother tongue of the Nicobar Islands and is understood by the tribes." This isn't mentioned in Andaman and Nicobar Islands#Talk. Shouldn't it? Are there other native languages in the islands (Northern Sentinelese at least, I gather)?

The wording is also odd: islands don't have a mother tongue, and why wouldn't tribes understand their mother tongue? I assume this should be clarified and the section expanded.

–LPfi (talk) 08:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forbidden islands[edit]

I suppose that we should make very clear the cases where legality of visits is unclear.

In Understand we say

"Of nearly 600 islands, only 9 are open to foreign tourists, and all of these are in the Andamans."

We list twelve islands or island groups and one reserve. Three islands were described as restricted or requiring permission (Jarwa Reserve and Smith and Ross Islands had no such comment). I think we should point out those that truly are open for the average tourist. Which ones are those? Are they all listed?

Smith and Ross Islands#Understand says

"It is questionable whether it's legal to visit these islands, although it has been in the past, and day trips are easily arranged from Diglipur."

There was no mention about this in the bullet for the islands, nor where they were suggested as a day trip in the bullet for Diglipur.

–LPfi (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Andaman_and_Nicobar_Islands&oldid=4855247"