Talk:Falkland Islands

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Formatting and language conventions

For articles about the Falkland Islands, please use the 12-hour clock to show times, e.g. 9AM-noon and 6PM-midnight.

Please show prices in this format: £100, and not FKP 100, 100 pounds or FK£100. The code {{FKP|25}} will give you: £25.

Please use British spelling.

Phone numbers should be formatted as +500 YYXXX.

Island Pages[edit]

Should the smaller islands (currently somewhat awkwardly listed under See) be joined together as a single, separate page, as "Outer Islands (Falklands)" or whatever the correct term is? It seems unlikely that they will ever grow into article-length entries. (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:53, 15 Feb 2005 (EST)

I'll update this a bit more as I have time. This is my first attempt with the whole wiki thing, so let me know if I'm doing anything wrong. I did try and read through the various style guides and a few other entries before starting.
The island bits can probably be moved to their own pages and expanded, and the Stanley section needs more work. Also, once the image uploading is fixed I'll try and add a few pictures to this section. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 01:02, 15 Feb 2005 (PST)
I've created two new pages for Sea Lion Island and Pebble Island using the district template -- hopefully this is correct. I followed what was done for the various districts in Singapore, but please let me know if there is a better way to handle this. And since it may seem odd to use districts for islands, keep in mind that in the Falklands the islands generally have a single owner and populations that you can count on one hand, so using anything more comprehensive seemed like overkill.
As long as no one objects I'll go ahead and do the same for the remaining islands under the "See" section.
By the way, how do you get the user and time link to appear under these sorts of postings? Do I just type them in myself, or is there an automated way to do it?
Hi! To answer your second question first, just type four tildas (the squiggle line, like in some spanish words... sorry don't know how to make it show up!) and it will put in your username and date automagically.
Now your first question, we really try to use the district pages only for real districts. No matter how small a destination is, it gets its own article. If these places are really really tiny, like maybe not even a Project:What is an article?, then you can put them as attractions. But if they are places you'd stay and eat and sleep, then they should probably get their own pages. I'll try and dig up the big long conversation that explains the reasoning behind this... I look forward to reading more! (WT-en) Majnoona 14:54, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)
Thanks! According to the criteria on the Project:What is an article? page the outlyting islands definitely should get their own article. If I'm using the wrong template (which is likely, I have a small brain) then let me know what is appropriate, although I didn't immediately see another template that looked relevant. (WT-en) Wrh2 15:00, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)
The template is fine (district & small city are pretty much identical), but the naming is a little off — districts are only used for huge cities. So I've moved Falkland Islands/Pebble Island to just plain Pebble Island, etc. If somebody ever writes up a Pebble Island somewhere else (?) then it can be moved to Pebble Island (Falklands). (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:29, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)
OK, sounds good. Thanks for cleaning up the pages. (WT-en) Wrh2 22:10, 16 Feb 2005 (EST)

Two thumbs up![edit]

Amazing work! Add in a few pictures, absorb the last bits of the Factbook and this will be prime Destination of the Month material. (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:03, 17 Feb 2005 (EST)

More Changes[edit]

Still trying to clean this up a bit more, but feel free to revert if I'm making a cess pit of things. After taking a look at how the entry for Hawaii is done I changed the Falklands entry so that the outlying islands are under "Regions". Also, since the "cities" in the Falklands have populations in the dozens, I renamed that to "Towns" -- feel free to revert if needed. Weddell is gone now, too -- it wasn't a place I remembered from my travels, and a quick look at the travel guide shows that it's not a major destination. Oh, I also removed "Other Destinations" since the islands are under "Regions" now. (WT-en) Wrh2 02:01, 17 Feb 2005 (EST)

You're doing a great job! The templates aren't cast in steel, feel free to edit them as necessary — places as remote and thinly populated as the Falklands don't really fit the city templates that well. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:55, 17 Feb 2005 (EST)

Goose Green & Port Howard[edit]

I'm going to be on the road for a bit, and internet access may be sporadic, but before I head off I just wanted to note that Goose Green and Port Howard still have no content behind them. I've not visited either place, and therefore wouldn't be able to create more than a basic stub for either one. For now I think both of these can be left empty, and hopefully in the future someone who has visited them can create articles, rather than me trying to cobble something together based on information from the internet and travel guides. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 21:50, 10 Mar 2005 (EST)

Cities vs. Towns[edit]

Since there is a descriptive note under "Towns" indicating that most settlements in the Falklands have populations of less than 50 it seems fair to leave the heading as "town". I realize that it doesn't exactly follow the template, but "city" seems a bit silly for the Falklands. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 08:53, 15 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Country or Territory?[edit]

The term Country is used several times in the article. However, it is really only a dependent Territory of the United Kingdom. So I think Country should be replaced with Territory or else island. -- (WT-en) Huttite 23:12, 2 Dec 2005 (EST)

Makes sense, thanks. -- (WT-en) Ryan 16:23, 3 Dec 2005 (EST)

Islas Malvinas[edit]

This article makes it clear that Argentina has claims on the island, but there have still been numerous edits to change the text of the article. At present the country is administered and most commonly known as the Falkland Islands, with the capital named Stanley. If you would like to change the article to more explicitly reflect Argentina's claims, please discuss here first with any arguments as to why those changes are appropriate. Undiscussed changes will almost certainly end up being reverted, so please take the time to state your case if you feel changes must be made. -- (WT-en) Ryan 16:23, 3 Dec 2005 (EST)

It looks like the Argentine vs. British debate is flaring up again, so I've toned down the history section a bit more to make it clear that the islands are controlled by Britain, claimed by Argentina, and the whole history of how things got that way is muddled. Per Project:Be fair#Political disputes policy is to "stick to the bare minimum of facts necessary, presented as neutrally as possible, while keeping a firm focus on the traveller's interests". A traveler doesn't care who had what garrison at what time in the early 19th century, so hopefully this new text is acceptable. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:17, 1 March 2010 (EST)

LAN Chile[edit]

Does the LAN Chile flight still exist as described? Their Website returns zilch for a Punto Arenas-Port Stanley routing. 81.138.12.5 12:04, 13 September 2006 (EDT)

It's not showing up on the LAN route map, so you may want to check with a travel agent. If it turns out that the flight is no longer operating please feel free to update the information in the Falklands article. -- (WT-en) Ryan 13:36, 13 September 2006 (EDT)

The LAN flight goes to Mount Pleasant (MPN), not Port Stanley (PSY).

Also 112 for emergencies?[edit]

I've never been to the Falklands (and am unlikely to visit there on my upcoming round the world tour). Does anyone know if 112 can be used in addition to 999?

http://www.falklandislands.com/shopimages/imagelibrary/pdfs/harbour-info-basic.pdf

--W. Frankemailtalk 17:06, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[]

Hi W. Frank, I have visited the islands and I'm pretty sure (but not absolutely certain) that 112 is a European thing, so only 999 is used on the Falklands. This cool list seems to confirm this. I think there's some technicality (presumably geography) meaning that despite being a territory of an EU member state the Falklands aren't part of the EU or subject to its laws and policies. Regards, --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[]

South America or not?[edit]

Currently the Falkland Islands are arranged in the hierarchy under South America. Is this the right place, or would it be better to categorize it under Islands of the Atlantic Ocean or Islands of the Southern Ocean (it's actually listed in Islands_of_the_Southern_Ocean#Subantarctic_islands and Stanley (Falkland Islands) is listed as a city there).

For a comparison, the Canary Islands are geographically much closer to continental Africa than the Falklands are to the South American continent, but they are still arranged under Islands of the Atlantic Oceanϒpsilon (talk) 19:35, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[]

I think it makes sense to leave them in the South America hierarchy. Argentina claims ownership of the islands, none of the current sub-Antarctic islands have any significant populations, and Wikipedia notes that the biodiversity of the Falklands is similar to Patagonia. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[]
Well the islands are in the south Atlantic Ocean, which is an undisputable fact versus semi-relevant details like Argentina's claim and how similar or otherwise the Falklands are to Patagonia. If there were no Islands of the Atlantic Ocean category, then obviously the Falklands should be listed as South American rather than Antarctic, but since there is such a category, I think we should use it. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[]
Would it break the hierarchy to list them in both? You can also make a case in the case of the Canary islands to list them under Europe, as they are and have been for centuries Spanish and are fully integrated with the EU.... (and the borders of Europe are a fuzzy concept to begin with not least with islands such as Malta or Cyprus) Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[]
(edit conflict) I don't feel strongly enough about a change to object, but having made several trips to the Falklands and to a few of the Southern Ocean islands I think South America is the right home for the Falklands. The various "Islands of..." pages exist mainly to serve as a home for articles that don't fit elsewhere, but the Falklands are a short plane ride from the continent, they lie above the South Polar convergence, Wikipedia and other sites list them as part of South America, they are part of the South American continental shelf... I just don't see a compelling reason to move them, and think that doing so will create confusion for readers who expect to find them as a part of our South America hierarchy. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:33, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[]
Well that's a more convincing set of arguments than before. They are a lot closer to South America than St Helena / Ascension Island are to Africa and so less ambiguous. I don't see why the Falklands couldn't be listed in both hierarchies, though if they can only be listed one place I am more convinced now that they should stay where they are. Just from a personal perspective (and I'm not saying this is relevant to the debate), having been to the Falklands but nowhere else on the continent, I've never really considered myself having visited South America. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[]
Simply from a geographic perspective the Falkland isles should belong with South America. Politically... well that is something we should keep away from completely :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:50, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[]

Usable Status?[edit]

I think this article needs to be moved up to usable status. Seems complete enough. Blackdiamand (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[]

See Wikivoyage:Country guide status. Do all the territory's main destinations have articles that are Usable or better? And, with no links to articles about the two main islands, is the article's regional structure valid, or if valid, Usable? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[]

Bad design[edit]

In a 1920x1080 screen there is a misalignment with the region map and the quickbar: the map makes the quickbar to go inside the article. Quickbar could be moved to the beginning of the article, but it may push map below, specially in larger screens, or could be added a "div clear". --Zerabat (talk) 18:07, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[]

If there's something wrong and you see a way to probably fix it, try fixing it when you have the time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:53, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[]
The quickbar is now placed in Understand in every country article, per this recent discussion. I've moved it down a bit though to get it away from the map; can you see any improvement Zerabat? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[]
Now it's OK. --Zerabat (talk) 12:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[]

Potentially new flight route[edit]

Seems like there might be a new flight route from Sao Paulo via Cordoba: https://en.mercopress.com/2019/04/26/falklands-second-flight-this-time-to-sao-paulo-set-to-start-in-november Just keeping a watch on this. Should update this if the flights actually show up for November (currently they don't). Marathonian (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[]

Good spot. Once it makes it out of the press and onto LATAM's booking website, we can add it to the article.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[]

Reinstated text[edit]

To be clear for the sake of copyright about restoring revisions, in a recent edit of mine I restored some content from an older edit without using the "undo" button. Of course, there might also be disagreement with the content I reinstated. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[]