Talk:Asheville

A wikivoyageer left the following links in Asheville that might be used to expande the article.

• Asheville Chamber of Commerce
• Brevard
• Hendersonville
• Pisgah National Forest
• DuPont State Forest
• Blue Ridge Parkway
• Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

-- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 19:05, 11 Feb 2006 (EST)

Latitudes/longitudes

This article would really benefit from latitudes/longitudes and a dynamic map. Volunteers needed :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Touting?

Is the material that was removed in this edit touting? To me it seems like the lively prose and interesting, vivid details were cut out, leaving a somewhat bland summary. Of course the references to "a few years ago" had to be adjusted, but I think many of the other details could stay. What do others think? (If anyone's interested, the listing was originally added by 152.2.197.91, who also added several other listings to the article.) Pinging User:Ground Zero. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mx. Granger: I actually opened the article to clean up the edit that you just fixed -- thanks for that. Somehow I ended up editing the Omni Grove Inn entry.

Here is the original version:

"Probably the most famous hotel in Western North Carolina, and has housed such famous guests as O. Henry, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and actor Daniel Day Lewis. A few years ago an amazing spa was added to the inn. It has several delicious restaurants and comfortable rooms. It's one of the pricier Asheville options, but for good reason. You could spend hours exploring the hotel and still not see everything. In the winter months it houses The National Gingerbread House Competition & Display and entries range from the heartfelt efforts of elementary age children to fantastic creations that must have taken months to prepare (a few years ago the grand prize in the adult category went to an elaborate and amazing reproduction of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry). The hotel even has its own ghost, the Pink Lady. Even if you can't afford to stay here, stop by the bar and lounge right through the front entrance for a cocktail or, in the winter, some delicious hot cocoa by the roaring fireplace. Wander outside for some of the finest views in Asheville."

This is what I replaced it with:

"Probably the most famous hotel in Western North Carolina. It has a spa, several restaurants and comfortable rooms. In the winter months it houses the National Gingerbread House Competition & Display and entries range from the heartfelt efforts of elementary age children to fantastic creations that must have taken months to prepare. The hotel has its own ghost, the Pink Lady."

To me, phrases like "an amazing spa", "delicious restaurants" and "You could spend hours exploring the hotel and still not see everything" sound like advertising copy, and don't belong here. The stuff about Hogwarts is nice, but visitors next winter can't see that, so it's just too much. Is the stuff about famous people who stayed there relevant to today's visitors? I don't think so, but if others do, then let's add it back in. I'll add back the part about stopping for a cocktail. I was being ruthless because the rest of it looked like touting to me. As it stands now, it's on the long side for a hotel entry. Adding back in the list of celebs would make it quite long. Ground Zero (talk) 17:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for adding back the part about the cocktails and so on. I agree that "amazing spa" isn't particularly informative. The Hogwarts part is interesting as it gives a sense of how elaborate the competition entries can get (following the writing tip of "show, don't tell"), but it's a fair point that visitors next winter can't see the same one. I'm neutral about the famous guests.

"You could spend hours exploring the hotel and still not see everything" is useful as it gives the sense that the hotel is huge and has lots of interesting things to see. And I think the word "delicious" is fine, assuming it's accurate. It's true that this listing is pretty long, but that might be appropriate for a hotel that's particularly interesting. We might be able to make some of the other listings more detailed too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Was "delicious" written by someone who has visited all of the restaurants, or by someone looking to big up the place? If I have to bet, I'd bet on the latter. Not being able to see everything exploring a hotel for hours? That seems like a stretch to me. I think it would be better to list things to see than to leave this vague, open-ended statement there. Ground Zero (talk) 19:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I suppose on that basis we could delete the word "delicious" from most of the 3,000 articles that use it. Since I haven't been to the Omni Grove Park Inn, I don't know whether it's true that one could spend hours exploring it, though I note that some of the TripAdvisor reviews comment on how huge the resort and its grounds are. One reviewer says "we did not leave the resort all weekend." What makes you think the description you removed is a stretch? —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

If I've been to a restaurant and think it's delicious, I'll add that. When I see "all the restaurants are delicious" right after "an amazing spa", I am sceptical. I have added a list of amenities to show the reader what is there, rather than just a non-specific promise of things. Ground Zero (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that addition.

The original listing didn't say "all the restaurants are delicious", and TripAdvisor reviewers seem to agree that the spa is amazing. I'm having trouble understanding why you're so skeptical of this listing. Is your point that you think the IP user was a representative of the hotel rather than a visitor or a knowledgeable local? If so, I don't share that impression—the usual red flags of touts aren't here ("we", name-dropping of other unrelated attractions, meaningless positive sentences, etc.), and the IP user added several other detailed listings and pieces of advice to this article . Is it possible that seeing the touty listing that was added today put you in an overly skeptical mindset with respect to this listing? —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, I don't care that much about this specific listing. I think I'm more trying to make a general point that there's nothing wrong with lively, positive descriptions of a POI. A positive review isn't necessarily the same as touting. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Lively, positive descriptions of places are great to have, but WV:tout encourages us to be specific instead of flowery:

"Avoid using flowery, vague terms in descriptions, instead describe why it is so great. "This stunningly wonderful hotel is fabulously luxurious!" is meaningless; "More staff than guests, three heated swimming pools, and each room has a jacuzzi, a bearskin rug in front of the fireplace and panoramic windows with views of the Mighty Mountains" tells much more. "

"Amazing", "delicious" (applied to several restaurants at once), and the bit about spending hours exploring without telling us what to explore, all fall into the category of "flowery, vague terms in descriptions". If you want to explain why the spa is amazing, based on the reviews, go ahead, but just saying it is amazing sounds like touting and provides no useful information. Ground Zero (talk) 21:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

[undent]The fact that those particular famous guests stayed at the hotel is interesting and should stay in the listing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. For instance, in New York City, people might want to stay at the Waldorf-Astoria because FDR stayed there, while someone visiting Penang might want to stay at the E&O because Charlie Chaplin or Sun Yat-sen stayed there. The dog2 (talk) 23:38, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

It's not something that interests me, but I'll respect the views of other editors on this, as always. Ground Zero (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Vegetarian food

I just removed Asheville from Travel as a vegetarian as there was nothing relevant in the lead or in Understand. Such a link should lead the reader directly to what makes the destination relevant as an example, not have them read through all the article wondering why it was linked – that's touting. I now see that the city indeed is known for vegetarian restaurants, but if that's a big draw, shouldn't it be mentioned in the lead? I am still a bit unsure about whether it should be readded to the topic article – that would require an explanation making it fit "smaller cities with particular reputations for alternative lifestyles" (or making context wording in the topic article fit what's here). –LPfi (talk) 09:46, 15 August 2023 (UTC)