Talk:Caldas da Rainha

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Long list of roads with no description[edit]

I deleted a list of roads with no description and got reverted without comment. In order to attempt to avoid an edit war, I'm starting this thread. Can anyone explain why this is useful to travelers?

"Other roads include the N114 (EN 114), N114-1 (EN 114-1), N115 (EN 115), N360 (EN 360), and N361 (EN 361)."

One point of style on this site is to avoid long lists:

"Long undifferentiated lists of hotels, attractions, cities, anything, are only marginally useful to the traveler"

So my point of view would be that either each of these roads should be given a description or the list should be re-deleted.

Please tell me why I'm wrong and this undifferentiated list should remain as is. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps instead of deleting "marginally useful" information, you can consider taking that information and building upon it as I have now done. As unpaid volunteers on this project, we don't always have time to make everything instantaneously perfect. Marginally useful is better than nothing at all. —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 22:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now it's useful. I'm an unpaid volunteer, too; did you think admins were paid? In your case, it looks like it would have been best to give you more time, but I had no way to know that, and you could have included an edit summary explaining that you were reverting my edit as part of a plan to add more information about these roads. Please consider using edit summaries whenever they could be helpful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. By "we" I meant you and I. I know that you don't profit either. —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Long lists of settlements[edit]

Please have a look at this diff I am sorry if I might sound blunt but: What purpose for the traveler does that serve? Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:14, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Travellers don't always stick to the road most travelled. Some people like to explore little corners that others haven't discovered. This information provides a springboard for such exploration. Much like the initially bare list of roads mentioned in the section above, the lists of settlements can serve as inspiration for expanding the article and making it more useful and informative for our travellers. —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 02:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission information and may be deleted:

You can see the details at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Km?[edit]

What if people doesn't know what km means? BorisKhlivski (talk) 17:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can add the conversion to miles if you want. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the food for thought. I'll consider using Template:Convert. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 19:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure! It's actually our collaboration of the month. There are details about the task there. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pages with broken file links[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Hello, fellow editors! Caldas da Rainha is in Category:Pages with broken file links. I'm unable to identify such broken file links in this article. How do I go about doing so? Thank you. --Nricardo (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was this image, used in a listing template. Images in listing templates mainly appear only when you click on one of the markers on the map, not in the main body of the page, so when there's an issue with one of them it can be a little hard to find. (I found this one by clicking through the markers one at a time until I saw one with red text.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Granger! --Nricardo (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rounding lat longs[edit]

@ThunderingTyphoons!: Hi, can we revert to revision 4119427 on this page? 82.3.185.12 17:52, 23 December 2020

@82.3.185.12: Sure, if you want. I recently cut all coordinates down to 6 decimal places and was thinking 4 might be even better, so I don't object to your edits. Thank you for diving in to improve this article. (If this was more of a how-to question: from page history, click on the version you wish to revert to, click Edit, then Publish changes. This should work cleanly if no subsequent edits by others were made.) --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 18:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nricardo: I changed it back to 6 digits because there is 249 different latitudes on there and I'm not changing them all manually. 82.3.185.12 20:57, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Star status - opinions[edit]

Okay, I'll start off the feedback. This is an excellent article that has everything you need - and more. I think its problem is not so much a lack of anything, but rather I feel the volume of information is too great to be comfortably navigated. When I started looking through this, my main emotions were awe and dread: awe as in "this article's really impressive, well-formatted, professionally written, and has loads of local knowledge"; dread as in "this is going to take me ages to get through, I can't be bothered to read all this."

One issue is it's not totally clear to me what the article's geographical scope is: just the 30,000-population city, or the 52,000-population municipality, the entire 362,000-population intermunicipal community, or some other area? The long list of neighbourhoods in 'Understand' and the map in 'Get around' would seem to suggest one of the latter two, and if this is the case you may want to consider either turning this into a huge city and splitting into districts, or keep this as the core city/municipality article and split off the more outlying listings into separate city articles.

If either of these were not achievable or wouldn't work for some reason, then I would suggest both:

  • organising listings by neighbourhood, rather than by theme, at the very least for the ones outside of the central core. And;
  • massively cutting down on the long lists of clothing retailers, supermarkets, pharmacies, and churches. Wikivoyage is not the yellow pages, nor can it try to be them. The number of 'See', 'Do', 'Eat' (minus the supermarkets), 'Drink', and 'Sleep' listings is actually spot-on for a standalone city article, it's just the volume of extras that makes this article less useful and more intimidating.

I think if you implemented any of these three ideas, our coverage of Caldas da Rainha would be just as comprehensive, but the article(s) would actually be a pleasure to read comfortably, rather than feeling like you're tackling a big book.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ThunderingTyphoons!:, thank you for the suggestions. I will work on these over the next few days: trim trim trim... The article covers the 52,000-population municipality, and none of the civil parishes (except maybe Foz do Arelho) merit their own article. Most sights of interest are in Nossa Senhora do Pópulo, the eastern half of the 30,000-population city proper. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 17:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. And please take your time; there's no rush.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:16, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Caldas da Rainha – Star nomination?[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Hello, fellow Wikivoyagers! I've been toying with adding Caldas da Rainha to Wikivoyage:Star_nominations, but I'm not fully convinced that it's completely ready for nomination. I would appreciate any "peer review"/comments/suggestions that you are willing to offer at Talk:Caldas da Rainha. Thank you! --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 14:51, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't got time to look through it in detail right now, but knowing the article and how much work you've put in, I'd definitely say it's a strong candidate for star status.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:37, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone else want to take a look? This is going to take more than one opinion to be promoted. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Star nomination[edit]

I may be biased as the principal contributer to this article, but I believe that it's comprehensive and well written. I recently cut a lot of the bloat and tightened the prose. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: See pre-nomination discussion at Talk:Caldas_da_Rainha#Star_status_-_opinions. I have implemented many of ThunderingTyphoons!'s suggestions. I keep tweaking the article, hopefully improving it with each edit. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 15:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ThunderingTyphoons!: I would appreciate it if you would please add your support to this nomination or express any concerns or objections that I can address. Thanks! --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 15:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's looking superb now! Did you only just add the "If your time is limited..." list at the top of See? That's a good feature I didn't notice before.
One thing I thought of before but didn't mention as it wasn't nearly as important as the other stuff: the article could either do with some more photos or the photos already present should be spread out, as there's no image of any kind from Eat all the way to the bottom of Cope. This is kind of a nitpick, but Stars are supposed to be perfect :P
I would definitely encourage others to take a look, as there may be other things to fix that I haven't spotted. But as far as I'm concerned, once the photo discrepancy is addressed, this is a star article.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ThunderingTyphoons!: Thank you. Good idea. I searched through my camera roll and found a few section-appropriate pics for that wall of text. Now uploaded to Commons and added to the article. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 20:23, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Oh, and yes I added "If your time is limited..." to make the options less overwhelming after you mentioned, 'dread as in "this is going to take me ages to get through, I can't be bothered to read all this."' --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 21:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Although it's not technically necessary, I would like to see some more opinions from different Wikivoyagers, so will once again ask for comment. The only purpose of this would be to absolutely ensure the article really is perfect. As there's nothing in the rules that requires a certain number of people to support, if the RfC hasn't attracted additional support or critique within a couple of days, then we can proceed with making it a star.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:35, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Outcome: passed.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 00:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Muito obrigado! --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Banner Image[edit]

I have switched banners.[1] Let me know if you have any objections. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Old
New
Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Caldas_da_Rainha&oldid=4143182"