Talk:Beijing

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived discussions


Page banner[edit]

[[File:Beijing banner 17 arch bridge.jpg|600px|thumbnail]] I wonder if this banner depicting 17 arch bridge on lake Kunming can fit to any of the district articles? --Danapit (talk) 07:42, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

It's in Beijing/Haidian now... --Danapit (talk) 09:17, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?[edit]

ForbiddenCity Banner.jpg

In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 04:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Different, but not necessarily better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm currently in the PRC, so cannot see any of these due to blocking. I would however suggest seeing if this would be better placed in the district of [Dongcheng] Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I prefer it to the current banner. For one thing, the current one has prominent slogans in Chinese characters which most readers will not understand. Pashley (talk) 14:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Why is that a problem? Part of the experience of being in China is seeing lots of signs in Chinese! Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
It would terrible to not expect everything to be written in Chinese here in China ;)
FYI, Berlin has the words "Dem Deutschen Volke" which I'm guess most people also can't read. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I think I also prefer the current one. This new one is a good banner in itself, and would be great for Dongcheng, but it doesn't generally call out "Bejing" to me as much. I also like the bright red colours of the one we have, they jump out. JuliasTravels (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


Another proposal?[edit]

Wikivoyage Beijing skyline Forbidden City banner.jpg

I took this picture a week and a half ago from my hotel rooftop with this sort of thing in mind. To me it captures Beijing ... the old China and the new, in one image. Any thoughts? Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The quality is much better than the current banner. My feedback would be that the Forbidden City is a recognizable symbol of Beijing, whereas your photo could be almost any Chinese city. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
OK, just thought I'd ask. Shame on Beijing's planners for not making their city's skylines as distinctive as Shanghai's. Or Shenzhen's FTM. Daniel Case (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
It's a very good banner and I like it, but I don't feel impelled to sub it for the current banner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. This is why we ask these things. Daniel Case (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

How about using this as the banner for China, then? As I said, it was meant to capture a sense of old and new, and if it "could be almost any Chinese city", it would be better there. Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

With only roofs in the foreground, there isn't much to focus on, so I don't really think it better than the current China banner, which is more visually interesting. What area of Beijing did you take this photo from? More than half of the Beijing district articles have no custom banner... Texugo (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
As should be clear from my comments and the angle of the photo, I was in the Dongcheng district, not far from the Forbidden City. I was asked before I went if I could take a better (i.e., non-smoggy) version of the current Dongcheng banner of one of the FC's courtyards (see above), which I did; however, it will require some stitching.

However ... I wonder if we wouldn't be better off with a separate Forbidden City article. I mean, it's a large World Heritage Site with a lot to describe, certainly more than our present graf can do justice to. If we have separate articles for other WHSes, like say Petra, Angkor Wat and Machu Picchu, as well as the Great Wall, I don't see why we couldn't have a separate Forbidden City article, which the current Dongcheng banner would better serve.

Should that come to pass, I have other photos of hutongs and such that might make equally effective banners for Dongcheng.

I have some pics of boats on the lake in Beihai Park with the Chinese Ministry of Defense buildings in the back that could easily be cropped into a banner for Xicheng (in fact I took it with that in mind). And some pics of the Olympic buildings (such as, yes, the Bird's Nest) that would probably suffice for Chaoyang. Beyond that, I'm no help. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I actually do somewhat like the idea of this being the banner for China, but I agree that there are many more arresting scenes that could be used for such a banner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
The Forbidden City does make some sense as a separate district. After all, it is a specific area of Beijing, and not a very small area, at that. Another precedent you can consider is the Central Park article. City parks don't usually get their own district, but Central Park is really considered its own area, as a large park that separates the West and East Sides of Manhattan, and there's plenty to cover in an article about the park, which actually is not yet exhaustive (the Northern Woods deserve coverage, when I or someone else gets the chance). So my feeling is, go ahead and create a separate Forbidden City article, either in article space or in your userspace and then moved to article space when it's ready. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Although physically the Forbidden city is very large, I don't recall seeing very much in terms of individual things to visit there. (There are the individual bed chambers of the aristocracy, a garden at the back) Did I miss something, or is it perhaps not worth to have this as a separate article? Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Remind me not to travel with you :-). When, perchance, did you visit?

There are a lot of things to see at the FC—I devoted most of a Sunday to it, with a trip to Beihai Park afterwards. The Lonely Planet guidebook I carried with me devotes eight pages to it. National Geographic Traveller has a five-page section in a guidebook devoted to both Beijing and Shanghai. Fodor's Beijing seems to have a separate section as well. The DK guide to Beijing and Shanghai has five pages (see 62–7). If our erstwhile competitors think it's worth that much of their space, we should certainly at least reconsider whether one measly graf is enough. Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I was there in Winter last year. I think that being a large exposed area in -5 temperatures probably didn't encourage me to linger. Also I had business meetings to fit my visits around.
Look forward to see what such an article filled with content would look like! Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
The notion of a separate article for the Forbidden City strikes me as excellent if someone wants to do the work. We do something a bit similar at Shanghai/Old_City. Pashley (talk) 13:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I will probably start it when I've gotten the Dongcheng article updated and expanded to what could well be a DoM candidate. Daniel Case (talk) 06:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Organisational idea[edit]

Hello Everyone, I want to create a more detail detail precincts in every district mentionned in Beijing page as well as to create a precinct which is very famous to put it as whole page like for Forbidden City, greatwall, ... etc to keep famous precinct more independant and get the relevant information quickly. What do you think? is it a good proposal —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)

What do you mean by a "precinct"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

A precinct is a space enclosed by the walls or other boundaries of a particular place or building, or by an arbitrary and imaginary line drawn around it.

Like for example Dongcheng District, we have: Wangfujing, Dongzhimen, Chongwen, Yonghegong, Gulou & Tiananmen which are the main famous precincts within this District.

So why not create a template listing in the Districts at the top of the page of every districts and then we will create a single independant precinct information like what alaready available for Chongwen or Forbiiden City or Greatwall.

it's going to give more relevant and clear information than gathering all information in one district !! —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)

Please sign your posts on talk pages like this one by typing 4 tildes (the ~ key) in a row at the end of your message.
The questions you need to answer in order to argue for your proposal are: (1) Does it better serve the traveller to have separate articles for all those precincts? And (2) do you plan on putting up enough content to make all such articles sufficiently detailed and interesting for the reader? I've been to Beijing twice but don't know the city well enough to express an opinion about this. However, I'll note that some really huge mega-cities like Karachi are not districted at all (meaning that there is only one article for the cities in question), because it was determined that that would best serve the traveller. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I came to Beijing 03 months ago and can know the city perfectly. I want to do same job as Wikitravel if you may see their Beijing page and their districts to understand my idea.

Yes, I can do it but I will still need someone to add informations in every single precinct to make it stronger. but sill can do it. —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)

Again, please sign your posts on talk pages. Also, please don't start work on these precinct articles (unless you'd like to do so in your own userspace) unless you attain a consensus in favor of that here. I'd counsel waiting at least several days for more comments. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

ok ok , but what do you mean by Again, please sign your posts on talk pages ??????? I'm already sign in using my user slimimp007 !!! —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)

You are not signing. Just type tilda (~) 4 times at the end of your message. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Just for transparency, I take it that you are user Salimtb007 on WT who created the precinct articles there? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes Salimtb007 is me, I've created both as one is for French page and the other one is for English page ~Salim —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)
My opinion is that although large, the second level Beijing articles are quite good as they stand. Splitting them further into third level articles will make the subject of Beijing too dificult to navigate. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, so this is all in the wrong place, but I hope to have some changes too. Sorry, I've been so busy lately to do something myself. I guess because WT doesn't have many editors, if Slim has been working on his own but not had the chance to discuss in the talk pages, and never had to sign anything. But at least he is trying to do the right thing, by discussing first. Nevertheless these Beijing articles are too long. The city is too big. Administrative districts like Dongcheng are a poor way to understand Beijing. Several proposals are being discussed, but this idea needs more work. Slim, please have a read of the whole page and listen to my proposal, and read some other opinions. Then write your proposal in a new topic: click "New Topic". Write one paragraph only. Travelmite (talk) 07:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
No-one is overemphasizing whether he's signing or not, but it would be nice if he would sign correctly even once, by using ~~~~ (without the "nowiki").
So back to the proposal, please. How many separate district articles do you think Beijing should be divided into, for the sake of Wikivoyage readers/travellers? Would anyone like to propose a complete list, indicating which of the proposed new articles is likely to be well covered in all of the more or less essential sections (Understand, Get in, Get around, See, Do, Buy, Eat, Drink, Sleep) in short order? I think that's an important consideration, because I don't see how it would well-serve the traveller to have loads of more or less empty articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The precinct articles on WT don't appear to be empty (at least the ones I looked at). I guess the question is do we really want to go to the third level here? For example Tokyo, Shanghai and Seoul are similar sized cities (of equal importance) and they are of a good quality with two levels.
There are presently 6 second level articles for central Beijing. I would rather split some of those up rather than create these third level articles underneath. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I guess he is gone now. My proposal is at the bottom of this talk page. Travelmite (talk) 14:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

List of universities[edit]

User:118.93nzp asked the following in an editing summary: "Do we really need this long list of tertiary institutions in a travel guide?" My answer would be "No, we don't." It's appropriate to mention the most famous universities in prose in the article for the entire city, then give regular listings for them as appropriate in district articles. A list this long is not appropriate, in my opinion. Another city with a whole bunch of universities, some of them famous, is New York. The New York City article, overall, is less than ideal, but New York City#Learn might be a useful section to compare to the overly listy "Learn" section of this article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is the full list below. I have retained just Peking University and Tsinghua Universities for now.
I'd suggest this is good material for a 'Study in China' article. Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
User:Pashley has a good sense of academia in China, so perhaps he can comment? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:29, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Beijing Foreign Studies University (北京外国语大学). China's most renowned foreign studies school. The Weigongcun is in Haidian District.
  • Mandarin House (美和汉语). China's most well known Chinese school. The Beijing campus is in Chaoyang District.
  • Global Village (地球村学校 Dìqiú Cūn Xuéxiào). Branches in both Wangjing and Wudaokou. This is school mostly used by Korean students.
  • Hutong School (胡同学校 Hútòng Xuéxiào). Branches in Gulou and Sanlitun. A very well know Chinese school, famous for its tradicional courtyard in Xicheng district. Also provides Internships and accommodation to international students.
  • Beijing Gateway Academy (北京网关学校 Běijīng Wǎngguān Xuéxiào). Branches in Andingmen and Wangjing. A well know language school that emphasizes custom language programs and small class sizes.
  • LTL Mandarin School (邻语堂 línyǔtáng). Focuses on teaching Mandarin through immersion into a Chinese language environment. Students live with Chinese homestay families, do full immersion trips in smaller cities around China and study in small groups or 1-on-1 in Beijing's Central Business District.

Being a yellow pages is explicitly not one of our goals, see Wikivoyage:Goals and non-goals, so we clearly should not have this long list. One thing I notice above is that the last few entries, from Mandarin House on, are not universities but language schools. They quite emphatically do not belong on the same list. Perhaps on a separate list for Mandarin learners, but are these places any good? Pashley (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Pashley, I noticed some were language schools and move few to their own section earlier. Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:17, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Do we want to have more than two universities on this list? If so, then I would consider adding Renmin, Beijing Normal, and Beihang Universities. Those seem to top a lot of rankings in the various source I've seen online. Edge3 (talk) 03:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Edge3, yes we can certainly include more universities on the list! I actually copy and pasted the list into this discussion for that precise purpose.
However I would disagree with your rationale. I don't think it should be a list of the 'top universities in Beijing' which sounds encyclopaedic, but rather the 'top universities for travelers in Beijing' which would use different criteria. Peking University may be the most awesome highest rated in China, but if not many foreigners are able to attend its courses then it may be less relevant than a less rated institution that has a large number of Chinese language courses for foreigners.
I don't actually have first hand knowledge of this subject, so I won't make any suggestions as to which institutions to use. Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I'd certainly keep Beida (Peking U) and Tsinghua; they are large, prestigious & very well-known. I'd add the Foreign Languages U, since it seems most likely to employ foreigners, but arguably the link to it that is already at China#Language_Teaching is enough. Beyond that, I do not know. Pashley (talk) 22:03, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I also agree with keeping Peking and Tsinghua. In addition to their high rankings and prestige, their campuses are often visited (either for sightseeing or for classes). I also suggest adding Renmin University. Locals and foreigners gather here every Friday evening to speak English (see English Corner).
Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting removing Peking University but rather saying 'prestige' is not the overriding criterion. Additionally, if an institution is visited for sightseeing purposes, then it should be listed under 'See' and not 'Learn'. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:47, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
The district-level page (Beijing/Haidian) already encourages people to visit the university campuses for sightseeing purposes. Does that affect whether the same universities should be mentioned in Beijing's "Learn" section? Edge3 (talk) 01:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm unaware of any policy or discussion around this point. I think there is no harm in mentioning the university as part of a suggested itinerary in 'See' in the city level article. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Empty Embassy Listings[edit]

There are many embassies with no information at all! It seems to be a default list, since Beijing doesn't have diplomatic relations with the Vatican. I am removing them until someone can fill in some details: Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:30, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Sensible decision. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
  • the Bahamas Bahamas.
  • Bangladesh Bangladesh.
  • Barbados Barbados.
  • Belarus Belarus.
  • Belize Belize.
  • Benin Benin.
  • Bolivia Bolivia.
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia and Herzegovina.
  • Botswana Botswana.
  • Brunei Brunei.
  • Burkina Faso Burkina Faso.
  • Burundi Burundi.
  • Cambodia Cambodia.
  • Cameroon Cameroon.
  • Cape Verde Cape Verde.
  • the Central African Republic Central African Republic.
  • Chad Chad.
  • Colombia Colombia.
  • the Republic of the Congo Congo (Republic) Chancery.
  • the Democratic Republic of the Congo Congo (Democratic Rep).
  • Costa Rica Costa Rica.
  • Cote d'Ivoire Cote D'Ivoire.
  • Croatia Croatia.
  • Denmark Denmark.
  • Djibouti Djibouti.
  • Dominica Dominica.
  • Dominican Republic Dominican Republic.
  • East Timor East Timor.
  • Ecuador Ecuador.
  • Egypt Egypt.
  • El Salvador El Salvador.
  • Equatorial Guinea Equatorial Guinea.
  • Eritrea Eritrea.
  • Ethiopia Ethiopia.
  • European Union.
  • Fiji Fiji.
  • Gabon Gabon.
  • Gambia Gambia (The).
  • Ghana Ghana.
  • Grenada Grenada.
  • Guatemala Guatemala.
  • Guinea Guinea.
  • Guinea-Bissau Guinea-Bissau.
  • Guyana Guyana.
  • Haiti Haiti.
  • the Vatican City Holy See (The).
  • Honduras Honduras.
  • Hungary Hungary.
  • Jamaica Jamaica.
  • Japan Japan.
  • Jordan Jordan.
  • Laos Laos.
  • Latvia Latvia.
  • Lesotho Lesotho.
  • Liberia Liberia.
  • Liechtenstein Liechtenstein.
  • Madagascar Madagascar.
  • Malawi Malawi.
  • Mali Mali.
  • Malta Malta.
  • the Marshall Islands Marshall Islands.
  • Mauritania Mauritania.
  • Mauritius Mauritius.
  • the Federated States of Micronesia Micronesia.
  • Moldova Moldova.
  • Mongolia Mongolia.
  • Montenegro Montenegro.
  • Morocco Morocco.
  • Mozambique Mozambique.
  • Myanmar Myanmar.
  • Namibia Namibia.
  • New Zealand New Zealand.
  • Nicaragua Nicaragua.
  • Niger Niger.
  • Oman Oman.
  • Palau Palau.
  • Panama Panama.
  • Papua New Guinea Papua New Guinea.
  • Paraguay Paraguay.
  • Peru Peru.
  • Qatar Qatar.
  • Rwanda Rwanda.
  • Saint Lucia Saint Lucia.
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Saint Vincent/Grenadines.
  • Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia.
  • Senegal Senegal.
  • Sierra Leone Sierra Leone.
  • South Africa South Africa.
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis St Kitts and Nevis.
  • Sudan Sudan.
  • Suriname Suriname.
  • Swaziland Swaziland.
  • Syria Syria.
  • Tajikistan Tajikistan.
  • Tanzania Tanzania.
  • Togo Togo.
  • Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago.
  • Tunisia Tunisia.
  • Turkmenistan Turkmenistan.
  • Uganda Uganda.
  • Uruguay Uruguay.
  • Uzbekistan Uzbekistan.
  • Venezuela Venezuela.
  • Yemen Yemen.
  • Zambia Zambia.
  • Zimbabwe Zimbabwe.
  • Kenya Kenya.

Chongwen and Xuanwu districts[edit]

They were merged into Dongcheng and Xicheng in 2010. I think we should merge them as well - it doesn't make much sense to keep them separate. IonutBizau (talk) 08:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

It is a detrimental and confusing arrangement. After seven months there is no objection to this proposal. These sections need to be fixed immediately. Travelmite (talk) 08:38, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
It should be noted that users 凡人丶 attempted to make this urgent change, but was undone because he did not realise the consequences. Help the new users. There is no disagreement that this should be fixed. M.R.Forrester also wrote "Xuanwu and Chongwen no longer exist" in the history. Do please do not undo this change without discussion. Travelmite (talk) 09:03, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there! First I want to tell you what you just did. The destination articles you just put out of sight (yes, luckily non-admins aren't able to delete articles) contain travel information that travellers now have a harder time finding. Precisely this and nothing else is what your and 凡人丶's "urgent changes" accomplished. Congratulations!
So, what has happened to the districts? Probably local bureaucrats in Beijing have changed the district borders. Then, please say so. But this doesn't mean that the sights, restaurants, bars, hotels etc. located in the areas formerly known as Chongwen and Xuanwu have vanished into thin air, does it!? (Besides, Wikivoyage articles do not always follow official districts, their borders and their changes to 100%).
So, here's the proper procedure for deleting a district article:
  1. Explain what you're going to do on the talk page and why.
  2. Put Template:Merge and Template:Merge from on the top of the affected articles (articles that should be deleted and )
  3. Wait for a few days or preferably a week
  4. Move the content of the article that are to be thrown in the oven to new articles
  5. Put the Template:Delete on articles that should be deleted — an admin will delete them in a few hours
I'd help out with moving article content but unfortunately I'm not familiar with Beijing and can't read Chinese. But apparently you're familiar with the city.
BTW I would recommend you to revert your edit yourself. Thank you. ϒpsilon (talk) 10:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
All that's changed is the table layout that surrounds the four articles and properly colour-coded to match the adjoining map. Links to the articles of the former districts have not been deleted. The information in the former district articles are not out of sight, and they have been handled as per the wikivoyage style. The former district article is not deleted, it is not orphaned and it is readily available to all users. When making changes like this, transitional arrangements are required to make the article accurate, until the operation can be fully completed. A key concern was that nobody has acted for several years. I am not sure the former districts need to be merged, because Beijing also sub-districts. Instead of merging, Dongcheng District itself (1.5 million people) may need to broken into sub-districts or tourist precincts. On the other hand, Chongwen and Xuanwu are not even used as location terms any more, but a name change may be more appropriate. Travelmite (talk) 11:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Oops, I just looked at the diffs and saw that districts had been removed from the list, just like the edit by 凡人丶 and thought it looked like vandalism.
If Chongwen and Xuanwu are really not used as location terms, then the names of the articles should probably be changed to something more useful (in the case we keep the current district article structure). ϒpsilon (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Options for correcting districts of Beijing[edit]

Dongcheng is the main tourist area of Beijing. The majority of major tourist sites are here. The four existing articles of Dongcheng District, Xuanwu, Chongwen and Xicheng District are based on obsolete boundaries. A safe, temporary fix is now in place to avoid confusion, but how to go forward?

  • 1. Merge Chongwen article into Dongcheng, and Xuanwu into Xicheng.
  • 2. Break Dongcheng and Chongwen into north, central and south parts. Chongwen and Xuanwu would be the south part.
  • 3. Break Dongcheng and Xicheng into smaller but more familiar zones, such as Houhai, Xidan, Gulou, Wangfujing and Yonghegong.
  • 4. Merge Xuanwu into Xicheng, but break down Dongcheng into parts
  • 5. Alternative points of view welcome
My preference is (3). Beijing is a megacity bigger than most countries, and more history too. Districts are administrative and not famous. This site should organised to be helpful to the tourist. Travelmite (talk) 11:21, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Articles should indeed be helpful to visitors, even if it means they aren't following administrative division exactly. As I said, you probably know more about Beijing than I do (so far it's just on my travel wishlist), but I think User:Daniel Case, User:Ikan Kekek, User:Pashley, User:Andrewssi2 can help? However we need to be careful not to make too many district articles, otherwise there might not be enough content. Eventually the static district maps need to be updated. ϒpsilon (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I am more worried about having too much content for some districts - especially Chaoyang and Dongcheng. Travelmite (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
I am concerned about changing to fit 'official boundaries' because they change all the time in China and often local people are not sure what the new boundries are!
However it would be good to change Beijing/Dongcheng specifically. Not only is there too much content to help the traveler select their itinerary, but also a bit unrealistic to walk from the north of the district to the south part. (Map zoom 12 is required)
Although I don't want to 'kick the can down the road', I think User:Daniel_Case 's view would be valuable considering he spent a lot of time there documenting for WV. (I only go to Beijing for business) Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi, everyone. I've been to Beijing twice but lack expertise on its districts, so I'll simply give you my blessing to alter the districtification of the city in whichever way is most helpful to travelers. I realize the question is what way is most helpful, but I'll have to defer to others, though when I have access to a computer again, not this dumb phone, I'd love to see a map and explanation of what you come up with. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I forgot about User:PalaceGuard008, who also has been contributing to the Beijing articles. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

@Travelmite, Andrewssi2, Ikan Kekek, Ypsilon:Thanks for all the pings; sorry it took me a while to get over here. I'm flattered by the idea that I spent "lots of time" in Beijing—it was less than a week, honestly, and certainly not all of it in Dongcheng (though I did have that page in mind when I was there). Yes, it's not ideal to walk from the north of Dongcheng to the south (by which I mean the old border with Chongwen) but that could be said of so many of our other district articles in other cities. I'm not sure that there's any rule that they have to be walkable.

I agree there's an awful lot in there, though. Perhaps, if we wished to trim it some more, we could look at what we've done with the similar Huangpu District in Shanghai, another area that receives the bulk of a city's tourist traffic (mainly to one area, in its case the Bund) and also has a lot of its own attractions and is equally densely developed. We've pulled French Concession and Old City out from it—it's still a pretty long page, but it would be a lot longer without those subareas (And I bet we could get away with pulling East Nanjing Road and the Bund out, too. Or just the former).

Perhaps we could pull Nanluogoxiang out (including the Drim and Bell Towers area)? It is a popular nightlife destination and could easily support its own page. Daniel Case (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Daniel. You are right that there is no requirement that the area must be walkable, I just found the district sizes in a comparable Chinese city (Shanghai) tend to be walkable.
I guess the current districts in Shanghai do work well, mostly because User:Pashley put a lot of effort into the task, and did actually carve out tourist areas in the manner that you described. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
The Huangpu district is a little over 20 km2, which makes it larger than the town I live in. I can walk around portions of it, especially downtown (less than a click away) and I have sometimes walked to a park that's a full mile (1.6 km) away. And there are other portions of it that I've walked to on occasion. But I would only consider the whole town "walkable" if your plan was to spend all day doing it. Daniel Case (talk) 21:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
The "Drum and Bell Towers area" is Gulou. With a density of 20,000/km2 yes all popular districts should be walkable. Sofar, no dispute about splitting Dongcheng, Xichang and Chaoyang into smaller, manageable areas? That's option (3) from my original list at the top of this section. Travelmite (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I could see splitting out say, Gulou and some other discreet areas (like Wangfuxing maybe?) but still not splitting up the whole district as there are no other intuitive areas (unless you know the subdistrict boundaries?) Daniel Case (talk) 21:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Use the subway lines as borders? Or just group blocks from the grided road system. It seems easy to do. 199.168.113.204 17:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
The latter seems like a better idea ... they are much more intuitive (the subway lines generally follow major roads anyway). Daniel Case (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Proposal to breakdown Dongcheng District
How would using roads as borders be intuitive, since only a taxi driver knows what road you're on? Actually, it almost does make sense to split Dongcheng by subway lines. Then you can walk from place to place. I'd suggest line 2, line 6, line 1 and line 7 to split it horizontally into five parts, then split between 2 & 6 with line 5. That would make: Ditan (nth-2), Gulou (2-6 west), Dongzhimen (2-6 east), Wangfujing (6-1), Chongwenmen (1-7) and Tiantan (7-sth). But, it's not perfect. I would keep the immediate area around Forbidden City and Tian'anmen Square separate again. So that breaks Dongcheng into seven areas. Travelmite (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Well, I didn't have a problem knowing what road I was on when I was walking around ... They do have signs. Daniel Case (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Streets seem more intuitive borders to me as well, and in practice they indeed run along the main street routes for large parts anyway. As a traveller, you may need to determine roughly which district you're heading for (and for major sights that's usually enough) but in the end you'll be looking for streets if you're heading to a restaurant or hotel. Signs are useful, but frankly... nowadays there's also google maps on your smart phone :-) In terms of huge Asian cities, I've found Beijing to be one of the easier to navigate. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
This "streets" vs "subway" debate is a non-issue. It's actually "streets" vs "streets+subway". If you follow the subway lines, then you know where you are going with both a street map AND a subway map, the latter being simpler to understand, as few people will easily see the difference between DongzhimenWaiDajae and DongzhimentNeiDaijie. Once you are already walking, the streets are obviously useful for navigation, but this guide will mostly used in advance of walking. It's for planning and preparing your trip. I put forward a plan for seven sub-districts to break-up Dongcheng. What do you think? Travelmite (talk) 09:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Sorry to have taken so long to respond, but I looked this over and thought about it a bit.

I like it. I like it a lot. Daniel Case (talk) 03:59, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Summary from organisational idea above[edit]

Proposal to breakdown Dongcheng District

Hello Everyone, I want to create a more detail detail precincts in every district mentioned in Beijing page as well as to create a precinct which is very famous to put it as whole page like for Forbidden City, greatwall, ... etc to keep famous precinct more independent and get the relevant information quickly. A precinct is a space enclosed by the walls or other boundaries of a particular place or building, or by an arbitrary and imaginary line drawn around it. Like for example Dongcheng District, we have: Wangfujing, Dongzhimen, Chongwen, Yonghegong, Gulou & Tiananmen which are the main famous precincts within this District. So why not create a template listing in the Districts at the top of the page of every districts and then we will create a single independent precinct information like what already available for Chongwen or Forbidden City or Greatwall. It's going to give more relevant and clear information than gathering all information in one district !! —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)

Just for transparency, I take it that you are user Salimtb007 on WT who created the precinct articles there? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes Salimtb007 is me, I've created both as one is for French page and the other one is for English page ~Salim —The preceding comment was added by Slimimp007 (talkcontribs)
My opinion is that although large, the second level Beijing articles are quite good as they stand. Splitting them further into third level articles will make the subject of Beijing too dificult to navigate. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
[Yes] these Beijing articles are too long. The city is too big. Administrative districts like Dongcheng are a poor way to understand Beijing. Several proposals are being discussed, but this idea needs more work Travelmite (talk) 07:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
So back to the proposal, please. How many separate district articles do you think Beijing should be divided into, for the sake of Wikivoyage readers/travellers? Would anyone like to propose a complete list, indicating which of the proposed new articles is likely to be well covered in all of the more or less essential sections (Understand, Get in, Get around, See, Do, Buy, Eat, Drink, Sleep) in short order? I think that's an important consideration, because I don't see how it would well-serve the traveller to have loads of more or less empty articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The precinct articles on WT don't appear to be empty (at least the ones I looked at). I guess the question is do we really want to go to the third level here? For example Tokyo, Shanghai and Seoul are similar sized cities (of equal importance) and they are of a good quality with two levels. There are presently 6 second level articles for central Beijing. I would rather split some of those up rather than create these third level articles underneath. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
My proposal is already written. I felt we had an agreement about it. I have copied the comments from above. Beijing is a far more complex city than Shanghai, Tokyo and Seoul, especially from a historical perspective. It's the Districts of Dongcheng is the main tourist district and needs to be broken down into 7 sections (see diagram). Chaoyang is the whole East of Beijing, and only 20% deserves to be broken down into smaller parts (Sanlitun, CBD, Olympic Park, 798 Art Zone, Lido, Airport). Travelmite (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, If nobody objects I am ready to Merge Xuanwu into Xicheng. That will solve half the problem. Ar2332 (talk) 10:17, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. Ar2332 (talk) 23:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Re Dongcheng, I suggest dividing into the following articles, from south to north: 1 - Chongwen (the old district, i.e. everything south of Line 2), 2 - "Central Dongcheng" (Wangfujing and Tiananmen), 3 - Forbidden City, 4 - Gulou, 5 - "Dongzhimen and Ditan". Thoughts? I think Ditan and Tiantan do not have enough info to justify their own articles. Ar2332 (talk) 23:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Beijing 2022 Olympics[edit]

I have created an article for the 2022 winter Olympics: Beijing 2022‎ --Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:26, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Anti-smog measures[edit]

environmental police Pashley (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata items for dynamic map[edit]

Below is the list with all Wikidata items for the districts of Beijing. This should simplify the work in case we want to change the district set-up in the future. --Renek78 (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Beijing districts
Name Wikidata-ID
Changping Q393485
Chaoyang Q394701
Daxing Q393445
Dongcheng Q394681
Fangshan Q393462
Fengtai Q393831
Haidian Q393454
Huairou Q121911
Mentougou Q185584
Miyun Q1022269
Pinggu Q393469
Shijingshan Q393475
Shunyi Q393482
Tongzhou Q393836
Xicheng Q30138
Yanqing Q596545