From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

the part about tap water vs bottled water is contradictory and wrong : "Do drink tap water instead of bottled water, which does nothing but drain your pocket of much needed kroners. "

so please correct

What's that section on "most expensive city"? The first part says its #15, then second part of the sentence says #1.  ?!?? (WT-en) Shoness 08:37, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Hey, so, that was a really really fast first draft, there. I get the feeling it was copy-and-pasted from somewhere else. Anonymous contributor, are you sure that's your original work? -- (WT-en) Evan 14:21, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)

Did a google search on some of the phrases, no match. Doesn't mean it's original, but it was easy to check. Just because your paranoid doesn't mean it's not copyrighted (copywritten?). (WT-en) Majnoona

Majnoona it is not nice to label someone "paranoid" just because they ask a question. Since we try to be both polite and correct here, please spell YOU'RE = YOU ARE properly because "your paranoid" is nothing like what you meant. (cuddlyable3) 08:27, 29 November 2006 (EST)
She's my wife, she can call me paranoid. Anyways, it's a common term for being extra careful with copyright; see [1]. --(WT-en) Evan 17:10, 29 November 2006 (EST)
I did a google, too. There's spelling mistakes and a casual style -- I think my initial worries were unfounded. It'd still be nice to hear from the author, though. P.S. "copyrotten". -- (WT-en) Evan 16:45, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)


Answer: No, it was not copied and pasted. I live in Oslo, so it was easy to write. Naturally, I looked at some other sources to get some details right, but it is not copied or pasted from somewhere. Good thing you are checking though...

Great! Thanks for confirming that. You can take our double-checking as a compliment! I lookforward to reading more. (WT-en) Majnoona

centre -> center[edit]

I converted all the instances of "centre" back to "center". We prefer American spelling. --(WT-en) Evan 11:01, 29 Dec 2003 (PST)

What's wrong with correct English spelling?

See Project:Spelling.
There's nothing wrong with it. It's just easier to have one way to spell things in Wikivoyage, and by default it's American spelling. By having a single standard, we keep from having needless edits and arguments.
It's not like it's wrong to use Commonwealth spelling -- it'll just get edited to American spelling. See the Project:spelling page for more details. --(WT-en) Evan 11:43, 29 Dec 2003 (PST)

Olympen closed[edit]

I deleted all references to Olympen (aka "lompa") as, alas, it's closed. It might reopen, but in a different version than the place we used to know and love.

Get out[edit]

I remowed the destination listed under further away. Since Get out is for day-trips, and sugestion of where to head next. Bodø and Lofoten is to far from Oslo to be listed in the get out section. (WT-en) ViMy 17:37, 31 May 2009 (EDT)

border control[edit]

When I drove from Sweden into Norway (over the E6 autoway) I got stripsearched and locked up in a jail for over 40 minutes and they made me undress, my car was taken apart (wheels of), lugage was completely messed around with. very really annoying. and for no apartant other reason than being either from Amsterdam and/or not white. Big fat warning, Norwegian border folks are nazi's.

Stay safe & healthy[edit]

Are we talking about the same country here? oslo is not a dangerous place!

It's the most drug ridden city in the Scandinavia, but yeah, while most of it is factually correct, it does seem a bit excessive. Not sure how to tone it down while keeping the integrity, I'd hate to remove good advices. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 16:13, 11 February 2010 (EST)


The description of Theatercafeen appeared as a review, I changed the subjective wording to a more descriptive one. --Erik den yngre (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


With 50+ attractions, 78 eateries and 43 places in Drink (if I counted them correctly), I think the Oslo article could be divided into some districts, just like other Nordic capitals. While I'm not really familiar with the city, I thought up an organization like this:

1. Sentrum: Inside Ring 1

2. West: Between Ring 1 and Ring 3, and west of Akerselva river.

3. Grünerløkka and Inner East: A triangle east of Akerselva, south and west of Ring 3 and north of the eastbound railway.

4. North: North of Ring 3 and the aforementioned railway.

5. South: South of that same railway. Could also include the islands right south of Sentrum.

Does this sound reasonable? Would Erik or Carsten R D perhaps have something to say? Ps. in case someone wonders, as usual I picked visible things like roads as boundaries rather than official district boundaries because the former are much more visible to travelers both on a map and when they're actually in Oslo. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Agree that official (administrative) districts (Norwegian "bydel") are not very useful for visitors. Perhaps divide along natural and clearly visible boundaries, and also neighborhoods that feels natural for strolling. The river (Akerselva) and ring roads is a good idea. Ring 1 however is not that visible and for instance the Palace is just outside ring 1. My modifications of the proposal
1. Sentrum: Inside ring 1 but including the Palace/park (until Parkveien behind the Palace) in the west and the including the railway station in the east (the river flows in a tunnel under the railway station tracks). Basically the area around Karl Johan street between the Palace and the station.
2. Looks OK, this would include Bislett/StHanshaugen, Frogner, Majorstua, Vigeland park and Bygdøy museums
3. "Inner east" looks good: Grünerløkka, Sofienberg, Grønland, Tøyen, Gamle Oslo, but perhaps we should include Ekeberg as there is not much of interest to the tourist further south.
4. North or "outer" Oslo. This is a less natural division except that it is far from the centre and transport is needed. This one would include Holmenkollen, Marka (the forest), Bogstad, Groruddalen, Østensjø, Teknisk museum.
5. South including islands, looks good.
Erik den yngre (talk) 09:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks! However for the border between Inner East and South(east), if there are not much to see in the South, then I think it's better to place Ekeberg there to make sure there is at least some content in the South article.
Let's move forward with this after a week or so, if no complaints come up. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
If the south includes islands there should be plenty of content, I think. I wider question: Should Oslo be confined to the municipalitity (official borders) or should the article cover areas that in practice are part of the city. For instance islands and Nesodden, and for the visitor there is no clear distinction between Oslo and Bærum/Asker (the two big suburbs in the west): It is one non-stop urban area covered by the same public transport, the metro and the tram runs from Oslo into Bærum. --Erik den yngre (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
First I actually planned to cover the city of Oslo per the purple borders here. Nevertheless it could be a good idea to also cover Bærum and other places further out, especially as they don't seem to have their own articles yet. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
For the visitor/traveler the distinction between Akershus and Oslo does not make any sense and has no practical significance, the most populus parts of Akershus (Bærum/Asker, Lillestrøm, Nesodden etc) are part of Greater Oslo. For the traveller I think it makes more sense to also cover areas such as Bærum and Nesodden as part of the city, I guess it does not matter if some of these areas are also included in the Akershus article. Erik den yngre (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ypsilon:If there are no objections within a few days or a week (are there any guidelines for this?), I think you can go head and create new articles for districts. --Erik den yngre (talk) 09:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Yup, I plan to do that sometime this week, if no objections come up. First, however, I need to add coordinates to the listings to see in which district to put each listing. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Great. I can help out adding coordinates. Erik den yngre (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate that. It doesn't take much time to add coordinates to one listing, but as there are hundreds of them.... ϒpsilon (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

By the way, there is a small error on the map. Wikivoyage map has "Langviksveien" where it should be "Museumsveien", right in front of the entrance to Norsk Folkemuseum. Erik den yngre (talk) 11:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I think maps are sourced from some central place in Wikimedia, and originally they're from Openstreetmap, so it's nothing that we can do about. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Provided that there has been no further comments, I'm going to create the districts today and move listings there. Starting with drawing the static district map first.

Another thing, as of now Oslo is directly sorted under East Norway in the hierarchy. As we per the discussion also will include places in the district articles that are not located in the city of Oslo, I think Oslo should be sorted under Akershus. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Actually, now looking at how far east the "West" district really stretches, it will sort of look silly. And considering we will include western Akershus too, it's going to comprise quite a huge area. I think I'm going to make an "Inner North" article comprising the sector from Highway 168 (Sørkedalsveien/Bøgstadveien) onwards to Akerselva. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:24, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Yippie! Districts are Yes Done. Or at least the listings are moved there... ϒpsilon (talk) 18:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Great work! Currently there are no listings for Bærum (except Kolsåstoppen summit), not even an article. So I think we should just include main sights in Bærum under Oslo north/west. If an article on Bærum is created, then listings can be copied, I think some overlap is perfectly OK. Perhaps in the end we should include Bærum and Asker in the Oslo article. Perhaps Oslo and Akerhsus should be merged? Erik den yngre (talk) 21:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Akershus vs Oslo[edit]

I dont think Oslo should be listed under Akershus, if anything it should be the other way around: Oslo metropolitan area includes: (1) City of Oslo and (2) Akershus. The best solution is perhaps to allow some degree of overlap because most visitors have no clue that Henie Onstad kunstsenter for instance is not in Oslo, and visitors to Oslo should be informed that Henie-Onstad is a gallery that can be visited while in Oslo. If listed only under Bærum most visitors will not find it, I think. Erik den yngre (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

How would this sound?
The western wing of Akershus (Bærum, Asker etc.) should absolutely be considered part of Oslo/West (is it better to rename it "Oslo/West and West Akershus"?) as there are just a few listings there now — it can always be split off later if the West article gets unwieldy large.
For southern Oslo, Ski, Ås and Drøbak already have their own articles, so Oslo/South perhaps doesn't have to stretch that far.
Cities east and northeast of the large forest, along the E6 (Lillestrøm, Jessheim etc.), should IMO get a couple of articles on their own.
And the Akershus article could be renamed "Akershus and Oslo" or "Greater Oslo", and still list Oslo as part of this entity, just like Stockholm is part of Stockholm County. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Ås and Drøbak are too far away and distinct to be included as part of greater Oslo, but Drøbak should be listed as "day out of town" option. Ski is a typical suburb and will soon be connected by a new high speed train. Lillestrøm is a smallish town but a typical suburb and in practice a part of Oslo, municipality borders are not logical around Lillestrøm so anonymous places like Lørenskog and Rælingen can also be included under Lillestrøm. There are few points of interest to the visitor at Lillestrøm, so can be mentioned under Akershus or Oslo or both. When one travel from Oslo to Lillestrøm there is a non-stop urban area (there are even plans to extend the metro towards Lillestrøm). Jessheim and Eidsvoll are too far from Oslo to be considerede part of Oslo proper (even if the airport is up there), and should have separate articles. Lets think about name for a merged article for a while. --Erik den yngre (talk) 06:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)