|This article was the Collaboration of the week between 5 December 2006 and 11 December 2006.|
Cracow, not Krakow
It's "Cracow" in English. Not Krakow. This article is in English. Please change all Krakow to Cracow in this article!
- I thought that it used to be called "Krakov" in English! Krakow seems fine to me though. -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:12, 10 April 2006 (EDT)
- This argument isn't that relevant as most places now call it KRAKOW. (WT-en) khrystene 11:54pm CEST 26/4/06 Twenty years from Chernobyl.
- I checked on the style guides for the Economist and the Guardian, and both spell it Cracow, so I've used that spelling here. User:(WT-en) Blowski 21:26, GMT, 23 July 2006
- This is the first I've seen of this spelling (and I've seen "Krakow" more times than I could count), so it'll take more than a couple newspapers' style guides to convince me that theirs is the standard English spelling. This isn't statistically valid, but a quick check of Google shows 139Mhits for "Krakow" vs. less than 6Mhits for "Cracow" (and less than a million for "Krakov"), which suggests very strongly that the one with the "K"s is the "most common English name" for the city. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 18:48, 23 July 2006 (EDT)
I was curious as to if anyone had any thoughts about the renaming of this article from Krakow to Cracow. I wasn't aware of an alternative spelling of "Kraków" until a Pole explained to me that English speaking persons spell the name "Cracow". At any rate, I was wondering if there was a most common spelling amongst my fellow English speaking brethren other than "Krakow". If Cracow is the most common spelling should we bother with changing the title, redirects and the such? Personally, I like Krakow. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 07:44, 7 November 2006 (EST)
- Ay, it appears that I happened to have overlooked a similar discussion. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 07:46, 7 November 2006 (EST)
- In my experience only Americans still use the term 'Cracow'. The proper name in English is 'Krakow'. I can sometimes understand alternate spellings if it helps pronunciation but spelling the city name with a 'c' makes no difference. The same applies for other Polish cities like Szczecin which is almost never referred to as 'Stettin' (the old German name) nowadays except by Germans. (WT-en) Xania 07:25, 13 December 2006 (EST)
- To clarify: Kraków is the offical estimated spelling for ad campains abroad as well as the the airport's name which was changed recently from Cracow do Kraków International Airport. Cracow, Cracovie, Krakau and other names are just used in particular countries.
- A Pole explained to you how English-speakers speak English? That vote should not count. Also, the web page mentioned as the first item in this section should not count because there is no indication of who wrote it and even though the writer is clearly convinced that he is correct, he does not provide any basis for his opinion. And the link to that page does not work. I think it must be meant to refer to this page:
- When Poles write in English for tourists, often they change the spelling to "Cracow", but I have never seen that spelling used by English-speakers in Krakow. The only English-language newspaper in Krakow is "The Krakow Post"  without a diacritical mark on the "o". I think Wikivoyage should not preserve diacritical marks because I think that most people, like me, don't know how to type them.
- Cracow. It's called an exonym. It's not an alternate spelling. When your city is important enough (like a world capital, which Cracow used to be), your city earns its name rendered in the languages of the world. Cracow—losing its sovereignty to foreign domination and to Warsaw (Warszawa)—hasn't had the easiest time staying popular and hanging in there in our language, especially after the late 20th century period behind the Iron Curtain.
- A large part of the problem is how close the English exonym Cracow appears to the Polish endonym Kraków, which gives the naive English speaker the impression that this is just a variant, perhaps even incorrect, spelling.
- My dictionary seems clear enough on the matter:
- Crac‧ow |ˈkrɑkaʊ|
- an industrial and college city in southern Poland, on the Vistula River; pop 750,540.
- It was the capital of Poland from 1320 until it was replaced by Warsaw in 1609. Polish name KRAKÓW .
- Kra‧ków |ˈkrɑˈkaʊ| |ˈkrɑkɔf|
- Polish name for CRACOW .
- (There is no entry for "Krakow" with an "o".)
- Similarly, the United Nations uses Cracow when communicating in English, one of the Secretariat's working languages. (The other being French—then it becomes Cracovie.)
- —(WT-en) Robert Johnson 07:41, 9 December 2009 (EST)
- Calvin and Hobbes used "Krakow". That's good enough for me. =) (WT-en) LtPowers 13:47, 9 December 2009 (EST)
It seems a bit excessive having so many districts for Krakow. Does someone who knows the city fancy removing or reducing them? -- (WT-en) DanielC 16:49, 5 April 2006 (EDT)
- Seems fine. Just edited the spelling and some grammar issues... But at least there's something interesting written about each area. Useful as Krakow is so popular and various districts hold various attractions. (WT-en) khrystene 12:18am CEST 20 years and 1 day from Chernobyl
- I definately agree that there are too many districts - 16 is alot!!! Something needs to be done to cut them down. The definition of whether a district warrants it's own page is if you can sleep there (see Project:What_is_an_article) So some of the districts here are okay, but alot of them aren't and these ones need to be integrated into related articles. I am suggesting this as a Collaboration of the week as in my opinion if the article get it's districts sorted, it's listings get MoS'd, it gets a decent main picture and a map then its a star article. (WT-en) Tsandell 07:04, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
- I've noticed the districts all have extremely similar text for the content... Anyone know if there is a difference between these districts?? Thanks! (WT-en) Kaci 04:59pm, 25 June 2008
The following district stubs exist, but were not linked to the main Krakow article.
I have listed these here so people can find them. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:30, 27 July 2006 (EDT)
- The Catholic Church dominates much of the city, and it is a common site to see Catholic Nuns walking around. The Jewish district of Kazimierz gives a pleasing contrast to this.
It seems as though some one is afraid of Catholic Nuns.
- That's the one of the most ridiculous thing I've read thus far. In no way does that imply someone is afraid of nuns. My favorite part of Venice was the Jewish Ghetto because it was the opposite of Venice's main attraction - The St. Mark's Basilica. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 07:44, 7 November 2006 (EST)
I changed it since, aside from neutrality, it is not accurate. These days Kazimierz is about as Catholic as anywhere else in Krakow.
- Good edit, but I thought I would just point out that Wikivoyage intentionally does not adhere to a NPOV policy. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 09:50, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
All comments in this section have been moved to the first section "Cracow, not Krakow".
Why does this article use the diacritic over the O? Our policy is to use English, and there are no diacritics in English. The current article title is the Polish name of the city using the Polish alphabet. (WT-en) LtPowers 07:53, 14 September 2010 (EDT)
- I don't know, the name of the article was like that when I started working on it few days ago and I thought this version was agreed. We can change it to 'Krakow'.(WT-en) Jjtk 03:15, 21 December 2011 (EST)
Okay, so these districts need to be seriously revisited and I'm going to take a stab at organizing it. Apparently, there are 18 official districts, but that's too unwieldy and it would be ridiculous for a travel guide to break a guide to Kraków down that much, so I'm going to propose the following:
- Kraków/Stary Miasto - Old Town with most of the important attractions - Old Town/Rynek/Jewish quarter/Wawel.
- Kraków/Nowa Huta (essentially the Eastern part of the city, but a Kraków/East is might be possible to cover everything that isn't exclusively Nowa Huta.
- I believe that Kazimierz/Jewish District should have its own article. It gets lost in the Old Town one and these two have quite different historical background, different feel from a tourist point of view and have well defined borders. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Jjtk (talk • contribs)
Hey, districts again. The way Krakow is divided know looks more less like this.  (I can't link it here, I messed up sth while uploading). I'd like to propose sth like this:
It's similar to what (WT-en) Sapphire suggested above, we loose Zwierzyniec and Dębniki (which are quite empty anyway), and names like Nowa Huta, Podgórze that might be confusing as there really are smaller districts with these names. And it looks cleaner. Thoughts? -- (WT-en) Jjtk 04:03, 4 February 2012 (EST)
- Ok, my first attempt at map making. -- (WT-en) Jjtk 11:28, 5 February 2012 (EST)
- Great map! A nice addition to the Krákow. I think the Kazimierz name could be bolded somewhat, so it stands out better. Also, the neighborhood names are not really necessary, they could be added to the district maps if they're made someday. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 15:03, 6 February 2012 (EST)
To get around
I wonder if there is a possibility to provide the article with a list of parking lots for cars as well as coaches near the city center. It would be very useful, I have long been struggling to fing a parking for a coach I am renting. Any help would be appreciated, which would of course be of use for the improvement of the article as well. (WT-en) Ferike333 14:07, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
- It's not a guide yet. All districts have to be at usable status for it to be a guide. For star status, all districts must be at least guide status. Also, I think the See section should be expanded. Globe-trotter (talk) 20:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think all districts actually are at usable status. 1Arena1hu (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Kraków/West might not be, but I honestly don't know what to put in Eat and Drink. Jjtkk (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry I've made a mistake I'll wait one day though (in case if I or someone else fulfil the requirements) and then downgrade it to usable. 1Arena1hu (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think all districts actually are at usable status. 1Arena1hu (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
A user who added details (including flight list) of Katowice airport to this article wrote:
- 'I wanted to upload the list of the destinations served from Katowice Airport, as it's the airport, which is s second airport serving Krakow city. the same is with Bergamo airport and Linate in Milan, or Sandefjord and Gardemoen in Oslo. Even despite lack of "Krakow" in its name, lots of people living in UK tend to chooose Katowice. What is more, the airport is a good alternative for the flights to/from Krakow, as the airlines operating from both are different, and offer different days or hours of flights.'
In my opinion it is enough to have that information in Katowice article (big city itself) and only mentioned and linked there in this one. There's already a lot of info Get in: By plane in this artice. Please weigh in. Jjtkk (talk) 16:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
- I suggested and my suggestion was supported (I have to find where, I guess it was Talk:Flying) to have all information related to an airport in either the airport's article, or the article for the city the airport is serving. In case of confusion, this should be the city after which the airport is named, which is Katowice in case of the Katowice Airport. The other articles for which the airport can be a good entry point should mention the airport and link to the main airport article or the appropriate section of the destination article.
- This is because updating information on airports, which does change ever so often (I am talking seasonal timetable changes, where destinations are dropped and added, ground transportation situation which changes, facilities open and closed, hours etc.), will be a chore and nobody will be able to track all the articles where the info needs to be updated. So we will end up with many articles giving possibly contradictory information on the same airport, and nobody will be able to establish which is correct and up-to-date, which will essentially make all this info useless for a traveller. PrinceGloria (talk) 06:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)