Talk:Ghost towns

Ghost towns?

Titles of travel topic articles about multiple instances of something are always in plural form (Old towns, Spas etc.). Shouldn't the title of this article also be Ghost towns? ϒpsilon (talk) 19:44, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Unless anyone objects, let's move it in 24 hours or so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Ninevah? Pompeii?

I think Nineveh more than crosses the line between ghost town and archaeological site/ruins and I think it very strange to list it here. If Nineveh is a ghost town, then we'd even have to list the ruins around Angkor Wat here, as they are about 500 years newer than Nineveh. Pompeii and Herculaneum, Easter Island and Machu Picchu, Luxor, Mohenjo-daro - these are never referred to as simple "ghost towns". If something has been in ruins for centuries and/or comes from a culture long since obliterated by the sands of time, it is not a simple "ghost town" and does not belong on this page. I believe some of these need to be moved to Archaeological sites. Texugo (talk) 17:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I definitely agree. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Pompeii is already on the list of archaeological sites, which claims (from that article's intro) to be "any place with physical evidence of past human activity. Such sites might be from pre-history as well as history; even remnants from modern times can count as archaeological sites." If we define archaeological sites that broadly, that is going to create a huge overlap with ghost towns with nothing preventing a place from qualifying for both lists. K7L (talk) 02:17, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

We should probably make an arbitrary year a cutoff point for archeological sites and the beginning of ghost towns. How's 1850? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:20, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Basing this solely on a year would be too arbitary; a more important question is what is left of the village? If there are still structures, even if the roofs have collapsed, it's a ghost town; if one needs a pick and shovel to find any evidence a place once existed, it's archaeology. If not even that remains (for instance, w:The Lost Villages (1958)) it's off the list entirely. Admittedly, w:Nineveh is complicated by efforts at restoration - there are structures there, but they're not true, untouched originals. K7L (talk) 03:42, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

OK, I understand your distinction. Which ancient relics would qualify as ghost towns under your definition? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Here's something for you to think about: Fatehpur Sikri is covered in the Agra guide, but as I remember, Fatehpur, the upper city which was built for the Royal Court of Akbar Khan, has no inhabitants, whereas Sikri down below does. Would you consider the beautifully-preserved architectural wonder of Fatehpur a "ghost town"? I don't think I would, because it doesn't have the same atmosphere of desolation that I would expect a ghost town to have. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Not sure why it's listed in Agra (35-40km away) as it's closer to Bharatpur (25km). From w:Fatehpur Sikri, "Today much of the imperial complex which spread over nearly two mile long and one mile wide area is largely intact and resembles a ghost town... The village of Sikri still exists nearby." It's borderline. It has a couple of independent hotels, local police and an active rail station but little else. The only WV:What is an article? issue for listing this as a populated place in its own right (not a suburb, not a ghost town) is the lack of a free-standing restaurant or grocer. There's a restaurant in the hotel, but that's it. K7L (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

We have to distinguish between Fatehpur and Sikri in our discussion. As for 1977, when I visited, the city of Sikri had a population of 15,000 or so, not close to a ghost town (the Wikipedia article lists the current population of Fatehpur Sikri 28,754, and I'm guessing all or virtually all of that population is in Sikri, but since there is no distinction made in the article...). The former Royal town of Fatehpur certainly appeared empty. And the railway station was in Sikri, but obviously, 1977 is quite a long time ago, and it would hardly shock me if rail service had been extended to Fatehpur. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

By the way, I think it's kind of ridiculous that Fatehpur Sikri doesn't have its own article. Look at w:Fatehpur Sikri. It's hardly a stub, and this is a major and complex tourist attraction. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Biggest Ghost Town in China

Due to high level of economic development in China in recent years, there has been a lot of construction of new cities that fail to attract people. Here is a BBC article about Ordos_City :

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17390729

I'm not sure how to categorize this on this page, since a town that was built yet never lived in isn't exactly the same as 'abandoned'. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems allowable, with some explanation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

What is the definition of a ghost town?

I remember reading about w:Cairo,_Illinois, and finding it interesting. This was a major Illinois city with major historical events during the civil rights movement which is now largely abandoned.

The stats are that is 1920 there were 15,203 residents and in 2010 it had 2,831.

Today it looks like a ghost town, but there are still residents and is not going away. Does this qualify for this article? Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I would say no. A ghost town has to be completely or virtually uninhabited - so maybe a couple of hundred residents at most. And even that is very arguable, as there are many non-ghost towns with populations of fewer than 100. Consider Baker (Nevada), for example. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:34, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I was a asking myself the same question when thinking about w:Uranium_City. It's a community in Northern Saskatchewan with population dropping from nearly 5000 to some 200 after the local mines were closed down in 1980's. Additionally, the place does not have any road connection to the rest of the world. I always imagined it to be a ghost town, but then I read somewhere there is one school open (with 2 teachers and about 15 students divided between kindergarten and class 9). But still, the community is collapsing, which might be one additional criterion. --Danapit (talk) 07:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Just to ask about your example, Baker appears to be a town that is small and always has been small (at least from my reading), whereas Cairo and Uranium City appear to have been large in the recent past and have now contracted to a fraction of their former populations?

But yes I agree that it is important to keep the scope to true ghost towns, not simply towns and cities (such as Detroit) that have suffered economic downturns. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

At some point, there are more abandoned buildings and empty streets than occupied buildings. Where do you intend to draw the line? 75% gone? 80% gone? 90%? More empty buildings than people? A large enough drop that the city is no longer functional for its original purpose? I presume you're intending to include Centralia (population 8) but exclude the city of Detroit (60% gone), a few other half-empty cities in the US Rust Belt, post-Katrina New Orleans (25% gone, 2005-2010). Picher (6 houses and a drug store, down from pop 15000) is a ghost town while Galena (pop 3000, down from 10-30000) is not? K7L (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I think you've got that right. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Propaganda villages?

( I mentioned this in Talk:Panmunjeom last week )

Kijong-dong is a village near Panmunjeom controlled by North Korea and apparently 'fake' according to many sources. I saw this excerpt from a new book claiming the same and thought it interesting.

http://boingboing.net/2014/07/08/north-koreas-creepy-fake-civ.html

So the village appears to be uninhabited, but it appears to be maintained for propaganda purposes. Is this a relevant ghost town? Andrewssi2 (Andrewssi2) 02:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

That's a different meaning of "ghost town" than the usual one. I'd allow it, but let's see what other people think. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I believe this will do as another category of ghost towns. Btw, interesting book, I even think I'll get it as holiday reading. --Danapit (talk) 08:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I also feel that the spirit of the definition of 'ghost town' is not exactly met here. It is close, but I guess the idea of visiting a ghost town is to be in a place where there was once a thriving community that has since disappeared, leaving mostly only dilapidated buildings and infrastructure behind. It would be great to have another category of Mysterious destinations (with a better title perhaps) to cover places such as Kijong-dong Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Would the Cold War be a valid travel topic in its own right, much like nuclear tourism? K7L (talk) 01:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

There was a good article in Wired recently about people who visit cold war sites in the United States. The problem is that visiting such sites, although not hard is technically illegal since they remain military property after the end of the Cold War in most parts of the world.

So I'm not sure how many sites could be visited that are not already included in nuclear tourism Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

There's also the military tourism topic. Anyway, I'm not sure: Are these actual ghost towns you're talking about, or just abandoned missile launch sites with a small barracks? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this is kind of going off topic. I see Kijong-dong as similar in being mysterious and inaccessible as Varosha in Northern Cyprus and Battleship Island in Japan, neither of which are Cold War related. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Film locations of ghost towns

Grantville, Georgia is a major filming location for the 'Walking Dead' TV series, due to its dilapidated and ghost town look. It is however not a ghost town.

Apparently there is a lot of global tourism because of the association with this series, and tours are available.

Could this be something for a 'Related' section, or perhaps a new type of article? Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Would it be valid for a "former ghost towns" section? The wording of the AP news wire piece "When the cotton mill closed, the rural Georgia town of Grantville began a slow transformation into a ghost town. Residents fled. Storefronts faded. Buildings decayed." seems a bit vague as it doesn't indicate what (or how many people) was there at the low point. WP has 2000 and 2010 census data, but little else in the way of historical numbers. uses the term "ghost town", but still no numbers. K7L (talk) 00:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

My reading is that it was never actually a ghost town. Just a run down town that maintained a population but became ideal for film sets owing to 'looking like' a ghost town.

I also thought the 'Walking Dead' reference would make it interesting to visit. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:02, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

One-person or one-family towns

What should be done with small places where very little was ever there, but which are nonetheless now abandoned or population-one? For instance w:Agloe, New York was created as a mapmaker's hoax, became a real place when someone plopped a general store down at the spot marked on the map, then just as quietly disappeared when the store closed. Swett SD, population two (and a dog), only had forty people in its heyday as a sprawling metropolis. Then there are the towns listed on http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/eco-tourism/photos/12-us-places-where-your-visit-could-double-the-population which, with the exceptions of Picher and Centralia, are a mess of population-one specks on the map. K7L (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm really not sure. Are there an almost endless number of "ghost towns" of this type, or would it be a manageable number? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Relevant story

Have a look. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Ghost fairgrounds and ghost amusement parks? I've added the few which appeared to have been actual former towns, but am unsure about the others. K7L (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Ghost amusement parks and fairgrounds seem to go beyond this topic, but I'm not sure. If there are a manageable number of these, perhaps they could be listed in their own section. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

List from another travel site

Around the world in 15 abandoned cities. any we should add? Pashley (talk) 01:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Varosha

For the record, according to w:Varosha, Famagusta: "By 1 January 2022, nearly 400,000 people had visited Varosha since its opening to civilians on 6 October 2020". Should it be removed? Is anyone here updated about the true facts on the ground? Ibaman (talk) 17:38, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I haven't been to Varosha, but I did some editing in its listing in the past, following its partial reopening. Although a few major streets of Varosha and part of its beaches are now open, most of Varosha is reportedly still cordoned off (I'd recommend checking out recent travel vlogs in YouTube, which can be accessed by relevant searches including Kapalı Maraş, the colloquial Turkish name for the area). Therefore, most of the area is still a ghost town (almost none of its buildings has been reopened to occupancy since 1974 nor has undergone any kind of repair), and most of those many visitors are indeed visiting for the ghost town experience they can only view from the linear spaces (the streets and beach I mentioned) they are restricted to within the area. Vidimian (talk) 18:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Saint Martin of the Tigers

I stuck it under Climate Change because sea level rise cut off its water supply, which eventually made survival impossible. But then survival was possible, if barely, until the Angolan Civil War delivered the death knell. But then if it had fresh water it probably could have survived the civil war. Also, I assume that sea level rise throughout the 20th century belongs under man-made climate change, but that's just my uninformed assumption. Anyway, point is, it could also fall under the war section. Good read here: Brycehughes (talk) 13:31, 2 November 2023 (UTC)