Talk:Jammu and Kashmir

Change recommended for location map

I reverted this edit to remove the map, because not showing Telangana doesn't make the map useless, but that said, it would be best to edit the map so as to include it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I substituted this map because it lacks crosshatching, which we don't use on Wikivoyage (we recognize all de facto conditions), but my remarks above still apply. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:00, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I see. Both maps are basically the same, except one uses solid red shading and the other doesn't (I guess that's the crosshatching). I agree with you on this; there's nothing wrong with the map, although I don't know the region or its geography, so I can't say for sure. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, now I'm really confused. Telangana (if you click the link) is nowhere near the area in discussion. I assume there is another place called Telangana. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:06, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

The map shows the Indian states. Telangana is the newest Indian state. It's like if you had a world map and South Sudan were still part of Sudan - even if the area highlighted on the map weren't nearby, you'd still want it fixed. ARR8 (talk) 23:44, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I see. That's not important enough to remove the image completely. I wouldn't dismiss a world map just because it didn't include South Sudan. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I totally agree on not removing the map. I'm just suggesting an edit to the map in order to improve it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Sure. I'm all for updating the map, just don't think we should remove a map just because one boundary line is missing or whatever... --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 02:34, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Wording of warning box

This language can't be right:

"Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is extremely dangerous"

First of all, we don't normally use "-occupied" for areas that have long been part of a country, since it's a political designation at least as much as it's descriptive, and secondly, this article is about the, if you will, "Indian-occupied" section of Kashmir. So I think the version on the left of this reversion is better phrased, although it's possible someone else might further improve the phrasing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Abolishing the subregions?

Although Jammu and Kashmir is made out of two distinct subregions, the number of bluelinked destinations is surprisingly low, given the importance of the region. There are 5 bluelinked destinations in Jammu Division and 7 bluelinked destinations in Kashmir Valley. Therefore, there are 12 destinations in J&K, less than the ad hoc limit of 18 destinations. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 10:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Since J&K might reincorporate Ladakh after possible statehood (although not the Article 370), I think I should keep the subregions. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:49, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Jammu and the Kashmir Valley are very different regions, anyway. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 25 October 2022 (UTC)