Talk:Kamphaeng Phet

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TAT Listings[edit]

I moved all TAT listings from the province page to Talk:Kamphaeng Phet/Listings for future reference. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:05, 5 February 2010 (EST)


If anyone wonders about the similarities between my additions and the German version: The latter is almost exclusively written by me (under the user name Bujo), the texts are all mine and not a copyright violation. --RJFF (talk) 19:52, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: Could you please check my language and style? If it is OK, I would like to upgrade this to "guide" status. --RJFF (talk) 12:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

No time right now, but perhaps someone else could check, or I may get to this later. Or you could just use your own judgment - anyone can change the status to guide, and it can always be changed back for cause. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
One quick thing is that, for better or worse, we don't use proportional thumbnail dimensions on Wikivoyage, so those will need to be (non-urgently) edited out. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Ruins of Wat Sing
@Ikan Kekek: I don't have a problem with reducing the picture in the top section to standard format, but the Wat Sing image has such an unusual, wide aspect ratio that it would be tiny without some upscaling (see right). Also, I could not find any rule against using proportional scaling in the WV:Image policy. --RJFF (talk) 15:33, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Contentwise it is a guide article, I just wanted to make sure that it also meets linguistic and stylistic standards. --RJFF (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
You can put in a particular number of pixels. We've had long debates on proportional thumbnail dimensions and never attained a consensus in support of them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Get around[edit]

Hello @Seligne: It seems we have some conflicting views which we should discuss rather than revert back and forth.

  1. I find it helpful to highlight the means of transport discussed in this section. It makes it easier for readers to jump to a certain means they are particularly interested in, instead of forcing them to read the whole section even if some means of transport may be irrelevant to them. And this is the exact way to use boldface explained and endorsed in the WV:Creating emphasis guideline. I do not understand your rationale for suppressing the boldface.
  2. Yes, there is a section on songthaeos (I favour the official RTGS over "karaoke" transcription) in the Thailand article and linking to it is certainly helpful (thank you!). But some readers may be lazy to click it (especially when reading on a mobile device) and, more importantly, for offline users (some readers download articles as PDF or even print them) the link does not work at all. So, it does not hurt to explain roughly what a songthaeo is, as a very short side note in this article, does it?
  3. I do not want to argue over British vs American spelling, but I do not find it friendly if you repeatedly "correct" my spelling even though "e.g." without comma is perfectly acceptable in British English. The same applies to "traveller" vs "traveler" etc.

Kind regards, --RJFF (talk) 16:43, 7 March 2019 (UTC)