Talk:Shanghai

From Wikivoyage
Jump to: navigation, search

Archived discussions


Shanghai districts[edit]

The Shanghai article is right now a mess because a lot of listings belonging to the districts are in the main article (and are not listified). I would like to help sorting this out, but I find it difficult as I do not see any defintions of the districts. So, I would like to ask: are the districts as they are now as they should be? or does anybody have any thoughts on needed changes to the districts? And can somebody give some advise on the definitions of the different districts (ideally by providing a map)? --(WT-en) ClausHansen 13:11, 13 April 2009 (EDT) --

The district classification is a mess. The French Concession hasn't existed for decades, and when it did, actually spanned both Luwan and Xuhui districts. And Nanjing Lu is a road by the way. It's going to be a nightmare to clean this up, but if someone's kind enough to do it, I would like to put forward a suggestion that we break up the entire city from scratch and re-categorise the areas according to the official delineation of administrative divisions. These are:
In Pudong:
浦东新区 Pudong New District
In Puxi:
静安区 Jingan District, 黄浦区 Huangpu District, 普陀区 Putuo District, 卢湾区 Luwan District, 闸北区 Zhabei District, 徐汇区 Xuhui District, 虹口区 Hongkou District, 杨浦区 Yangpu District, 长宁区 Changning District
Others:
南汇区 Nanhui District, 嘉定区 Jiading District, 宝山区 Baoshan District, 松江区 Songjiang District, 金山区 Jinshan District, 青浦区 Qingpu District, 闵行区 Minhang District, 奉贤 Fengxian District, 崇明县 Chongming County
For now, most of the article revolves around Pudong and Puxi.
(WT-en) Lai.jack 09:52, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
I agree that this seems to be a reasonable way forward. However, it is a lot of districts, maybe some of them, especially in 'other', could be merged. Any thoughts on that? and on which to merge? --(WT-en) ClausHansen 11:32, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
I don't, I think The Bund, The French Concession and Pudong should be kept, since they mean something even to people with no connection to Shanghai, and are actual destinations for tourists - I don't mind if you redefine their borders, but I really don't think they should be dropped. I'd suggest something like this
  • The Bund (Yan'an Road - to Waibaidu Bridge)
  • French Concession (Xuhai & Luwan districts) - Also a handy way of merging two quite similar districts to something with a sensible name
  • Old City (Yuyuan).
  • Pudong
  • North (Baoshan, Jiading, Quingpu + the parts of Songjiang and Minhang north of the river)
  • South (Jinshan, Fengxian, Nanhui + the parts of Songjiang and Minhang south of the river)
For the remaining parts I don't mind if we used official borders. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 12:34, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
Well, that could work too, I guess, and would certainly reduce the number of districts. How should we define The Bund (only that street?)? and the Old City? --(WT-en) ClausHansen 15:04, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
Not sure about The Bund, but the old city is easily defined as the egg shaped (or very obvious circular) area inside Renmin Lu and Zhonghua lu
Ok, I will give it a try in accordance with the above suggestion implying the following districts: Pudong, The Bund, French Consession, Old City, Jingan District, Huangpu District (excluding Old City), Putuo District, Zhabei District, Hongkou District, Yangpu District, Changning District, North, South and Chongming County. This will be done as follows: Keep the Bund as is (but later check, if everything in there is placed correctly); keep French Concession as is (but later check, if everything in there is Xuhui&Luwai); move the contents of Xujiahui to French Concession; move the contents of Nanjinglu to Jingan District; keep Yangpu as is; establish the remaining district articles; move listings from the main article to the respective district articles --(WT-en) ClausHansen 12:06, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
Defining the districts may be an ongoing process. The article is slowly improving and we're in dire need of a map. Is the current district name "Former French Concession" a double negative? I don't believe the French have "won" that area over. :) I've worked on attempting to clean up the articles and would encourage anyone out there with map making interests to plunge forward. I hope to return to the city soon and add some photos to bring this article alive!(WT-en) Zepppep 16:52, 9 December 2009 (EST)
It's a difficult issue, I actually tried making one when we reorganised, but there are not enough free sources to make it, since private mapping is illegal in China, and subject to severe punishments. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 16:57, 9 December 2009 (EST)
I've got a map http://wikivoyage.org/upload/shared/b/bc/Shanghai_Admin_Districts.png but this shows the districts as per officially defined. Frankly, I still can't figure out how it can be of any help to a visitor by labelling everything in names long forgotten. If you tell a Shanghai cabby to get you to the "French Concession", you'll likely draw a look of bewilderment and half a dozen questions. :) (WT-en) Lai.jack 11:07, 11 December 2009 (EST)
We certainly need to look at redistricting Shanghai (in agreement with the statement above). I took a look at a starred-article, Chicago, and noticed it has 10 major district definitions and 35 sub-districts within those 10 larger ones. I would suggest something similar for Shanghai. To have the "French Concession" as a major district on the page seems a bit outdated, not just in terms of naming convention but more importantly, the increased amount of things of interest to travelers (I know the term means something to foreigners, in particular, and it should definitely be mentioned in Understand and District sections, but to go as far as to still use it as district??). Earlier, someone posted they thought Xuhui and Luwan districts aren't quite similar; I would have to politely disagree. Luwan has lots of neighborhoods which are quite important to give the reader a better understanding about; Xuhui is a little more spread out and has some major landmarks and major shopping areas. It would be OK to mention the French Concession area used to be made of parts in both districts, but using it as THE district identifier is a) a bit confusing and b) asks for too much info. to be crammed into a very large "district" with lots of interest to travelers. In summary, Chicago has 35 sub-districts and Shanghai only 14 (and of those 14, some are confusing to get a mental picture of, I think, exacerbated by the face we lack a map). Any recommendations Lai Jack?(WT-en) Zepppep 16:20, 14 December 2009 (EST)
(Quick interjection—Chicago actually has only 21 district articles). --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:30, 14 December 2009 (EST)
I see 33 districts listed on the main Chicago page. I haven't checked to see if there are articles for each, but the point I was trying to make was that someone at one point in time thought 19 districts for Shanghai was too great; I'm merely trying to say that although Shanghai dominates Chicago's population by 3-6x, it has far fewer district definitions than Chitown. 19 may in fact not be too many but certainly the current # is too few. I'm not wanting to merely add districts to say that "Shanghai is bigger, it should have more districts" but to agree with others on the page the current set-up is too simplistic and using current district names would draw confusion from both locals and cabbies. I've been to the metropolis 4x in the last year alone and when I try to ask drivers off-the-cuff about "French Concession," I don't get any sort of response. The article is slowly improving and defining districts will be a big help. Cheers.(WT-en) Zepppep 10:20, 15 December 2009 (EST)
It is great to see the Shanghai articles moving forward again! In relation to districts, there are two questions: 1) Should we split up the two suburb districts into the respective administrative districts? I think not, these articles have almost no content and the individual administrative districts are not likely ever to make it to guide or even usable status. 2) Should we split French Concession up into the two administrative districts? Well, the article as it is now works well and is not too long, so unless a lot of further listings are expected, I see no reason to split it up. In my opinion, the question about what taxi drivers know or do not know is not so important here, the important thing is to put an adress in each listing sufficiently clear to show to a taxi driver. However, if French Concession does not mean anything to travellers and the two administrative districts are very different, that could be an argument for splitting the article. I would like to see more opinions on this, before we split this usable article up into two outline articles. In relation to the comparison with Chicago: Districting Chicago and Shanghai are done very similar as it is now with individual articles for the central districts with a lot to see and do and with districts further away from the centre being merged in a few suburb articles. (WT-en) ClausHansen 11:14, 15 December 2009 (EST)
If you guys insist, I don't mind it much if Luwan and Xuhai was broken up, but other than that I really don't see the point of breaking up Shanghai any further. Distrification should be based on content, not how many districts other cities have. Empty articles by-and-large discourage editing, while well established articles encourage users to add the one or two missing listings they think are missing. Which is why Delhi with 12 million residents currently don't have any districts, while Copenhagen with only a million have 9. As for Chicago - Chicago's districts currently contains 851 kb of text, while Shanghai's districts only have 97 kb, the total Shanghai text about the same as the Stockholm article's 150 kb, which doesn't have a single district.
And after reading though the French concession guide, it actually works really well as a way to build an article I think. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 12:03, 15 December 2009 (EST)
I'm glad someone brought up the Chicago article. Its clear partition of the city by making use of main and sub districts makes it such an enjoyable read. I believe the Shanghai article can be crafted from a similar approach. No zone should be deemed too large or too small (within reason of course) to write about. Right now, almost everything in the article revolves around a few Puxi districts and Pudong, with little else related to anything else, but that doesn't mean information on the less visited areas wouldn't become available in the future. Having limited information on certain districts shouldn't stop us from zoning out a baseline that includes them. Quick question: Would having empty articles be violating Wikivoyage's policy? If so, I stand corrected. If not, then better to create the empty sub-articles now and wait for content to be composed, than to have to break up the sections again when they grow too large in the future.
A few other observations:
1. The Bund and Old City are actually points of interest within the Huangpu district, which itself is already a comparatively small district. They should be created as sub-districts within the Huangpu district article.
2. I'm in favour of breaking up the French Concession. I've been researching a little bit on its origin and boundary definition, and from several accounts, it is not exactly a straightforward amalgamation of modern day Luwan and Xuhui like how we tell it here. Some of it actually extended deep into the Huangpu district. (WT-en) Lai.jack 10:14, 17 December 2009 (EST)
There is no rules against creating empty districts, but it's certainly not encouraged either, many cities have had empty districts for years to an end. From my point of view, it would be better to follow Chicago's approach, which exactly did wait for districts to grow before splitting them up - I think it's the best way to achieve coverage - people are more likely to add content if there is something there already.
The structure is easily build with redirects, so one approach would be to create all the missing districts as redirect pages, and making sure addresses in the listings include the district - i.e. "Shanghai Lu 47-B, Fengxian", so it's easily split up by anyone once the article becomes large enough. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 10:30, 17 December 2009 (EST)
Alright guys, how about this. We can have Puxi as a zone by itself in the main article alongside Pudong, the North zone, the South zone and maybe Chongming island county. Four or five in total. The Puxi article could then be subdivided into the 9 admin districts (or some other way), each one considered a subzone and having its own article. Corresponding maps for the Shanghai and Puxi articles shouldn't be too difficult to visualise and create right? (WT-en) Lai.jack 10:42, 17 December 2009 (EST)
I learned from the discussions on districtifying London that no cities should have three levels of articles. Therefore, I am not in favour of the above suggestion. (WT-en) ClausHansen 11:01, 17 December 2009 (EST)
Last suggestion. Scrap the Puxi level, but still group the individual districts within it in a Puxi zone, just like how it's done for Chicago. We end up with the following 2-level structure.
  • Puxi districts (Yangpu, Hongkou, Zhabei, Putuo, Changning, Jingan, Huangpu, Luwan, Xuhui)
  • East districts (Pudong)
  • North districts (Baoshan, Jiading, Qingpu)
  • South districts (Songjiang, Minhang, Fengxian, Jinshan)
  • Others (Chongming County)
(WT-en) Lai.jack 11:33, 17 December 2009 (EST)
Agree, except that I think we should not split each of the north district and the south district until we have more content in these. (WT-en) ClausHansen 12:00, 17 December 2009 (EST)
I like Lai.Jack's suggestion above, but rather than "North districts (Pudong" I say we just have it say "Pudong district(s)." Pudong is so often referenced that it more or less stands on its own and doesn't need to have "East districts" before it. It's much like Puxi--it's one of the big ones. Especially when considering the Pudong airport, I think it makes a lot of sense to have it more or less treating like Puxi (there are smaller areas known within Pudong, such as Lujiazui). Other than that, I'm a big fan of having a good article listed out beforehand and letting the info. be put onto the proper article pages, rather than waiting until the article grows before setting up the framework. I would venture to say there are examples that support and detract support for this idea. I think other well-written articles can be used as a guide, but following the letter of the law for that article isn't mandatory, right?(WT-en) Zepppep 09:22, 18 December 2009 (EST)
Updated http://shared.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Image:Shanghai_Zones.png Now we need a kind volunteer to tackle the content. (WT-en) Lai.jack 00:18, 20 December 2009 (EST)
I spent some time this past weekend thinking about items on the discussion page: 1) awesome job on the map, Lai.Jack! 2) I'm still relatively new to WT so will heed to others with more experience and their opinions in general--particularly admins-- however I'd like to state two things. A) I realize getting content on the article to help travelers is why we're all here, and there are ways of encouraging content to be posted. Still, however, I can't go along with the argument "let's get content now, worry about organizing it later." In the case of London, the current CotM, one of the items on the to do list is districtfying and putting content on the relevant district pages--perhaps an avoidable expenditure of time for the few individuals who had put things on the right page. This is quite a bit of work, and it only takes one or two people to post a bunch of content which then takes someone else to come along and put it in the right place (I am aware of WT's policy about not creating district pages as the need arises). I think it's better to build the foundation, then worry about the decorations. B) It's important to mention some historical references whenever possible to give the article some life and context, but names and places change. Few cities in the last two decades have seen as much change (in many ways) than the metropolises of China. Some of the historical references to areas, while meaningful to "outsiders" perhaps or locals alike, change and while it's maybe helpful and/or interesting to list some of these changes, what's true for today may be something entirely different (this is largely based upon the districtification of Shanghai and yeah/nay on the French Concession name). 3) It's been fun discussing how the article page should go. The city has withstood some tremendous changes--on shear volume alone--and each time I look at the page, I think it's showing more and more improvements (for such an important place, the article was looking rather dull and disorganized until recently).(WT-en) Zepppep 18:33, 20 December 2009 (EST)

I tend to think that both good content and good structure (which makes it easier to figure out where to add that content), encourage good contributions. Perhaps we could think here about a possible "final" districts scheme and what it would look like, but for the time being, keep larger districts in use that could in the future be broken into parts. That's precisely what we did with Chicago, which is generally a good article to look at for guidance.

You might also be interested to look at Wikivoyage_talk:Geographical_hierarchy#Optimal_districts_schemes, which was inspired by this discussion. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:00, 20 December 2009 (EST)

I'd like to use the map here: Wikipedia as the base. It seems to me that gives a much better overview of outlying districts than our current scheme. It might need airports added, maybe lines 1 & 2, and Pudong split up a bit. Nanhui & downtown Pudong are quite different, for example.
The "Southern suburbs" "Western suburbs" stuff we now have strikes me as just adding an irrelevant (not generally used in Shanghai; people say Minhang or whatever) useless (to travellers) and broken (it forces us to split Songjiang & Minhang to fit our procrustean categories) layer. The sooner we can eliminate those, the better.
I think our "Inner Districts of Puxi" section is fine, as is the district split under it, though I'd call it "Central Puxi", or even "Central Shanghai". "Pudong and outer districts", though, is an error; those need to be two separate categories. (WT-en) Pashley 20:45, 28 July 2010 (EDT)
We do not have enough content to justify individual articles for each of the suburban districts. Therefore, I suggest that at least for now we leave the structure as it is. This is in accordance with the structure in many other large cities like Chicago and London, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 03:59, 30 July 2010 (EDT)

Another good WP map is at wikipedia:List_of_administrative_divisions_of_Shanghai#Subdivisions. As I see it, those are much better than our current maps because they show the actual districts, the ones that are used in printed addresses and in conversation in Shanghai. Ask someone in Shanghai where they live and they are very likely to use one of those districts, though they might say "French Concession" instead. They may name a nearby landmark, metro stop or major street, but they are likely to add the district as well.

Things we have added like the bogus groupings "Pudong and outer districts", "Southern Suburbs" and "Western Suburbs" add nothing, nor does the silly split of Minhang into two pseudo-districts. I see no reason to even consider keeping them.

At some point, we will probably need to split Pudong up, separating downtown Pudong, which is full of skyscrapers, from the less developed Southern part Nanhui, some of which is downright rural, and maybe splitting out some other districts. For now, though, a single Pudong district is fine. Other than that, we should just use the usual Shanghai district boundaries. Pashley (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Reading back through this, Lai Jack's original suggestion (second contribution in the section) looks very good to me. It uses the administrative districts as I argued just above that we should, and it has Nanhui as a separate area.
Apart from the administrative districts, I'd say French Concession, Old City and Nanhui are the only things to add.
Treating Shanghai/Nanjing Road and Shanghai/Bund as districts is silly; they are major streets and important tourist attractions, but they are not districts. Pashley (talk) 14:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

See also #District_changes.3F below. Pashley (talk) 11:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Metro pic[edit]

Would anyone be able to resize the pic posted a while ago of the Metro map(WT-en) Zepppep 15:28, 21 December 2009 (EST)? It's huge! (I plead ignorance on this...)

It's huge indeed. And outdated too. Line 7 is missing. (WT-en) Jack Lai 05:06, 22 December 2009 (EST)
Line 7 was added nearly one year ago, but it no longer reflects the current line. I left details on the image discussion page. (WT-en) Zepppep 04:26, 31 December 2010 (EST)
It is quite badly out of date. Lines 7 and 10, both heavily used & going to tourist sites, are missing. 11 & 13 are not shown either. Also, since this map was made both ends of line 2 have been extended, out to the two airports, and the south end of line 8 extended a long way as well. There may be more changes I don't know about.
I'd say this is unmaintainable, given how fast things change in Shanghai. It may be a copyright violation as well.
Perhaps we should get rid of the map entirely, just link to the official site.[1] That has additional info as well, like first & last train for each route and links to single-line maps. Pashley (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I have removed the map, replaced it with a link. Pashley (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm back in Shanghai for the first time since 2012 and maps in the metro stations show several lines that I don't remember from before: 11, 13, 16, 20. The map we link to has most of them but I think some of our text needs updating, especially in some of the suburban district articles like Nanhui where some of them go. Pashley (talk) 09:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Shanghai is a place that needs updating every 4 months :) They will be new lines every year as well. Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Deletion[edit]

I removed two chunks of text from the Hongqiao airport section: "If Pudong airport is an option for a flight it is vastly preferable to Hongqiao as it is difficult to determine if a departing flight is from Terminal 1 or Terminal 2; a mistake involves a 20-minute ride between the terminals. At the time of this writing neither the Hongqio airport's English website nor Shanghai airlines website stated which flights depart from which terminal." and later " If you miss your flight at terminal one and need a flight out of Pudong, you will have to take a shuttle back to Terminal Two, then navigate that labyrinthine terminal to find the shuttle to Pudong, costing you another ¥40."

These strike me as basically useless, but it seems worth checking for other opinions. Pashley (talk) 21:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Question about propaganda museum[edit]

What are poster prices like there? I ask because they vary quite widely in my experience.

As a Canadian in China, I wanted a poster of Norman Bethune, a Canadian doctor quite well-known there. The most common one has him on horseback, galloping through the countryside with medical bag in hand and a couple of Red Army soldiers behind. I found one at the French Concession tourist memorablia shop "Madame Mao's Dowry" for 2000 rmb (with Bethune described as French, yet!) and bought one in the outdoor antique market for 40 rmb. Mine is somewhat smaller and it seems possible Madame M's was real and mine a reprint, but that is still a whopping difference.

Does anyone know what these posters cost at the museum? Pashley (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

District changes?[edit]

I would like to see our coverage here get up to Guide status, and perhaps later even Star. With that, Shanghai would be a natural for Destination of the Month, since it is large, important and heavily touristed. Currently, though, it falls short of Guide criteria:

Probably the hardest is (from Wikivoyage:City_guide_status): For huge city articles, all district articles are at least "usable" status. The following districts are currently below that:

Listed as "inner districts", all on Puxi side of the river:

Listed as "Pudong and outer districts":

Most of those just need expansion (mainly more listings) to get up to Usable status. However, I feel quite strongly that we need changes to the district organisation as well. See #Shanghai_districts above for older discussion. I have fairly strong opinions on what needs to be done, and will start on the simple changes soon.

  • Create articles, mostly only redirects, for official districts that currently have none.
    • French concession mentions (Luwan, Xuhui)
    • Western suburbs lists (Baoshan, Jiading, Qingpu, Northern Songjiang, Western Minhang)
    • Southern suburbs lists (Jinshan, Fengxian, Southern Songjiang, Eastern Minhang)
  • In the process, get rid of the arbitrary splits Northern/Southern Songjiang and Eatern/Western Minhang
  • Add an article for the unofficial district Nanhui; the term is in common use in Shanghai and the area is quite distinct from the more developed central area of Pudong

For the larger or potentially controversial changes, I'll wait a few days to see anyone objects here:

  • Merge Shanghai/Bund and Shanghai/Nanjing_Road into Shanghai/Huangpu. These are attractions/streets in that district; redirects are fine but they should not have independent articles. Both the proposed mergees currently list hotels etc. that are some distance from the streets.
  • Once that is done, consider merging in Shanghai/Old_City as well.
  • Trash the current organisation of the district list in the main article, breaking it into "Inner districts of Puxi" and "Pudong and outer districts" where the latter then includes "Western suburbs" and "Southern suburbs". All but the first of the quoted phrases are entirely artifical.
  • Replace it with:
    • "Inner districts", which splits into "Downtown Puxi" and "Pudong"
    • "Outlying districts", which links to various suburban district articles
  • Trash the "Western suburbs" and "Southern suburbs" articles

Comment, anyone? Pashley (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

w:List_of_administrative_divisions_of_Shanghai#Subdivisions has a map I consider far better than ours; I will likely put it into the article once I work out how the templates can be imported.
It also divides the districts up in an interesting way, not much resembling either what we currently have or what I suggested above:
  • Puxi
  • Inner suburbs - Pudong, Minhang, Baoshan, Jiading
  • Outer suburbs - the rest?
  • The islands -- Chongming and a couple of small ones near it
I suggest we adopt that division scheme. Pashley (talk) 21:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Many are now usuable; I've just added Yes to indicate that. Pashley (talk) 04:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Feedback wanted[edit]

What I think is better text is at User:Pashley/Shanghai, intended for use with the map at w:List_of_administrative_divisions_of_Shanghai#Subdivisions.

I want to replace the whole Shanghai#Districts section, except for the introductory paragraph, with this and trash both existing maps. Comments?

I saved the existing section at Talk:Shanghai/Districts.old and replaced it with Shanghai#Districts. Comment still wantedPashley (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Next?[edit]

I made the changes above, drastically re-arranging the Districts section and creating several new district articles. Then I made a copy-editing pass through the whole article, fixing grammar and re-organizing to eliminate some severe redundancy. For example, the Cope section included "Tips on shopping" which I moved to Buy and had its own Talk sub-heading.

That was only a first pass; it still needs a lot of work. Would anyone care to jump in? Pashley (talk) 22:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Pudong Airport[edit]

I have moved the details of Shanghai Pudong International Airport to its own page. This is in line with the Wikivoyage:Airport Expedition initiative, and reduces the amount of text in the main Shanghai article whilst allowing more details for this airport to be added. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Shanghai has two airports. Are you also going to do an article for the older Hongqiao Airport? It handles nearly all domestic flights plus some to nearby countries like Japan & Korea. Pashley (talk) 15:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
The reason to create an airport article is usually if the airport merits its own destination guide, and I think Pudong airport does. Hongqiao is an important airport, although (I feel) people are unlikely to spend too much time there. Tokyo Haneda and Seoul Gimpo airports are very similar to Hongqiao in that they are secondary airports that mostly serve domestic routes with a handful of international flights, and they also do not have their own pages yet. If someone would like to create a page for Hongqiao then that is fine however. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

New districts map[edit]

Shanghai districts map.png

I just finished a pretty fancy districts map! It's far from perfect, because not all the data is out there yet (at least not in a free enough form to meet the CC-by-SA requirements). That means that I've pretty much had to leave the "parks" layer off, the street grid is patchy, especially outside of downtown, and the non-downtown district borders were drawn freehand, and are therefore not very precise. I think it's a good step up from the weird huge thing we have right now, though ;) The colors are meant to show each individual district distinctly, but keep the same color scheme for the groupings as in the article now, in a fashion similar to Washington, D.C.#Districts or Chicago#Districts. --Peter Talk 15:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks. I have inserted it.
Possible improvements would be showing Shanghai#Water_towns, or at least the two that are out on the borders so easier to show, and indicating the Downtown Pudong vs Nanhui split as shown here. Shanghai/Pudong#Districts Neither is urgent; as is, it is quite usable and far better than any of the several earlier maps. Pashley (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
What tool did you use to create this map? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Just Maperitive and Inkscape. There are detailed instructions at Wikivoyage:How to draw a map#SVG imports from OSM. --Peter Talk 17:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Plus a couple of spelling corrections to make:
  • Songjiang district (instead of Songjang)
  • Jiaxing city (instead of Jiashing)
Good job on the map! Lai.jack (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I've now updated the map with the suggestions above. Since we're using a separate article for Nanhui, I would recommend linking it from the districts section. --Peter Talk 20:53, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
There is a link under districts at Shanghai#Outer_suburbs with a pointer to it earlier at Shanghai#Inner_suburbs. Also Pudong#Districts has some explanation. Are you saying we need more? Pashley (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see it there now. I think each instance where a region was linked but not in one of the bulleted lists was something that I missed. Others might miss them too. Maybe just bolding the instances of individual articles would take care of this problem. I suppose I should change the color of Nanhui to the blue scheme too, right? --Peter Talk 04:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Connections to Hong Kong[edit]

Can somebody update the following?

Hong Kong by Train: There is good detail, however no indication about how long the journey is! Can this please be added?

Hong Kong by Bus: There is no section on this, however I understand it is a viable transport option when the planes are not running.

I always fly between the two cities by plane, there I don't feel I'm in the right position to update this myself. Thanks, --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Once the line down the coast through Xiamen opens late this year, Shanghai-Shenzhen should be under 12 hours on that route. See Xiamen#By_train.
I do not know times for the current inland route. It is longer but some trains on it are the 300+ km/hr G trains. See w:Wuhan–Guangzhou High-Speed Railway Pashley (talk) 23:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I've never done the whole route by bus (thank heaven!) but have done large chunks of it. Fuzhou-Shanghai and Xiamen-Shenzhen are both typically done on overnight sleeper buses (not comfortable if you're tall!) in around 8 or 10 hours. Xiamen-Fuzhou is about four. Pashley (talk) 23:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
The Xiamen-Shenzhen fast train line is now in service & I've updated both the Xiamen article & this one. Pashley (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Merging?[edit]

I do not think Shanghai/Bund and Shanghai/Nanjing Road should have district articles. They are not districts, just roads. Also, there are problems in the current articles like the Bund listing a hotel on Xizang Road and Nanjing Road listing the Hyatt, which is in Pudong.

As I see it, the Bund should certainly be merged into Shanghai/Huangpu and redirected there. I'd say Nanjing Road should be merged partly to Huangpu and partly to Shanghai/Jing'an then made into a disambig page. I would not merge Shanghai/Old City (also in Huangpu district) but a case can be made for doing that as well.

Other opinions? Alternate suggestions? Volunteers to do the work? Pashley (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Agree that the Hyatt definitely belongs in Pudong. I guess it reachable from the Bund so it should go under 'go next'. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:42, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I have done the merging, but now Shanghai/Huangpu and Shanghai/Jing'an both need considerable work. Listings are inconsistently formatted, not all are complete, there is some duplication, none of the lists are alphabetised, no doubt I have put some things in the wrong place, and so on. Volunteers? Pashley (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing note[edit]

I changed the foreign population numbers in the lead section. Unlike WP, not everything here needs a cited source; indeed external links are discouraged. However, it seems to me the source of my numbers is worth noting here. Pashley (talk) 22:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Web search for cities around the 208,000 number for foreigners in Shanghai shows Spokane and Bordeaux around 210,000. Pashley (talk) 23:23, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Getting to guide?[edit]

As I wrote above at #District_changes?

I would like to see our coverage here get up to Guide status, and perhaps later even Star. With that, Shanghai would be a natural for Destination of the Month, since it is large, important and heavily touristed. Currently, though, it falls short of Guide criteria.
Probably the hardest is (from Wikivoyage:City_guide_status): For huge city articles, all district articles are at least "usable" status.

Current district status for downtown is:

  • Changning outline, but I think ready to promote
  • Huangpu usable
  • Hongkou outline, though there is a fair bit of content
  • Jing'an outline, incomplete
  • Putuo outline, though there is a fair bit of content
  • French Concession usable
  • Yangpu usable, thanks mainly to a new contributor
  • Zhabei outline, quite weak for a large & central district

Except for Pudong, the suburbs are all rated as outlines. Some are nearly empty while others have quite a bit of content.

Would anyone care to pitch in here? Most of these articles need help. Even if you don't know Shanghai, you could check whether current status ratings look correct. Pashley (talk) 04:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

District Status Banner
Front Page Usable Yes
Changning Usable Yes
Huangpu Usable Yes
Old City Usable Yes
Hongkou Usable Yes
Jing'an Usable Yes
Putuo Usable
French Concession (Xuhui) Usable Yes
Yangpu Usable Yes
Zhabei Usable Yes
Pudong Usable Yes
Minhang Usable Yes
Qibao redirected to Minhang
Baoshan Outline
Jiading Outline Yes
Fengxian Outline
Jinshan Outline Yes
Qingpu Outline
Zhujiajiao Usable Yes
Songjiang Usable Yes
Nanhui Outline
Chongming Outline Yes

I like making these tables to keep track of things, and did a quick little audit of the article statuses. Weak Eat sections seem to be a recurring problem, stopping articles from reaching usable status, which for district articles requires 1-2 listings in Eat & Sleep, the main attractions covered, and a usable Get in section. It would be nice to try and get one district up to guide status (which of course means a fair amount of work I can't really do myself), if only to add some green to this table ;)

I still find the Districts + Other areas sections very confusing and overwhelming. Actually, despite being the person who drew the districts map, I didn't realize there was a Shanghai/Old City article until just now! This risks readers not just missing important information, but entire articles. I think I can help with this, and will try some reorganization when I'm less tired. Awesome work, though, Pashley. --Peter Talk 04:53, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I've given the Old City more prominence in the list.
What is now "other areas" was once a subheading under "districts". I gave it is own higher-level heading to keep the districts section from being too overwhelming. Should that be reversed? Should we use another name such as "Landmarks"? Pashley (talk) 14:17, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I actually think we should get rid of that section, since it really muddles districts navigation, and move the content mostly to "See" (and to other sections as appropriate). --Peter Talk 19:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that would make sense. Pashley (talk) 19:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Did that. Moved it all to See which is now a bit of a mess, but perhaps we are making progress. Pashley (talk) 00:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
I notice that the Baltimore table includes a column for which articles have maps. Shanghai itself has no maps except the districts one and a 1907 historical map; both are good for what they do but neither is useful as a general-purpose map. I do not think any of the districts have maps yet. Would anyone care to take that on?
The most useful single map, I think, would be one of the central area — at least the Huangpu, Jing'an and Xuhui districts, and maybe all eight listed as Shanghai#Downtown — showing the main features listed at Shanghai#See. Pashley (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps a map bordered by metro line 4, which is roughly circular? That would include central Pudong, Shanghai Railway Station, and some things like Qipu Lu shopping (Shanghai#Clothing) and the main gallery area that are central but outside the three districts above. Pashley (talk) 17:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
That could be nice (similar to what's at Washington, D.C.#See). Could you give me a numbered, alphabetical list of the names of the attractions you want on the map, like this:
1. Cool sight
2. Worthwhile attraction
3. etc.
Then I'll see what I can/can't do. For the individual district maps, we may as well wait for the Wikivoyage:Dynamic maps Expedition to be ready. --Peter Talk 22:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

It has just been promoted to Guide, but it does not actually meet all the criteria — not all districts are at Usable — so perhaps that should be reverted. Alternately, revise the table above for a current check on district status, then do some remedial work on districts. Pashley (talk) 10:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unaware of the criterion of all district guides being usable. When taken as standalone the Shanghai guide is definitely at guide level and perhaps could even shoot for star status. The problem with Shanghai is that as a city there are a lot of districts without a great deal to say about them. Perhaps we need to redouble our efforts in places such as Shanghai/Chongming where many foreigners (myself included) have never visited. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Map stuff[edit]

Web search for "Shanghai tourist map" turns up a dozen of them. Here's a decent one that covers roughly the right area, albeit with more detail than we might need & missing metro info.

We want all the metro stations in the area, and the lines shown in the usual colour code (see Shanghai#By_metro, 4th para). Certainly lines 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, probably 3 & 4, maybe others.

Bodies of water

  1. Huangpu River
  2. Suzhou Creek, a tributary which is the northern border of Huangpu District

Districts:

  1. old city (roughly circular, in the middle of Hangpu)
  2. Huangpu, mostly between the old town & Suzhou Creek
  3. Zhabei, North of the creek
  4. Jing'an, West of Huangpu
  5. French Concession, SW of Huangpu, inland of old town
  6. Pudong (specifically Lujiazui) across the river, inside a river bend that points at Huangpu. Enough of it to show the Century Avenue station, which I cannot find on map linked above. See Shanghai/Pudong#Get_in for reason.
  7. maybe Putuo, W of Zhabei

Major streets. Lu is Chinese for road. Many have one of bei, nan, dong, xi or zhong (N, S, E, W, & middle, respectively) in the name, I think we should ignore that here, but a 2nd opinion is needed.

  1. Remin Lu & Zhonghua Lu, where the old city walls were
  2. The Bund, along the water, West side
  3. going South, the Bund becomes Zhongshan Road. That goes S, W, N and E to become a ring road, looping around most of downtown.
  4. ferry near S end of Bund
  5. Nanjing Road, running off the Bund & West
  6. roads parallel to NJ Road: Fuzhou Road, a couple of blocks South, and Beijing Road, 1st major street North
  7. Yan'an Elevated Road, the main E-W freeway downtown
  8. Xi Zang (Tibet) road, runs N-S on E side of People's Park
  9. Chengdu Lu, N-S, becomes Chongqing Lu
  10. Shaanxi Lu, N-S, further W
  11. Huahai Road, shown partly in purple on map linked above, roughly parallel to NJ Road, well S of it, continues out past the library (a line 10 stop) and Soong Qing Ling's house (an attraction)
  12. Fuxing and Changle Roads, N and S of it & parallel
  13. Hengshan Road, Goes S off Huahai near Changshu Road station (line 1 & 7)
  14. Xujiahui, mega-intersection where Hengshan rd ends
  15. Hong Qiao Road (to airport), W out of Xujiahui
  16. Zhao jia bang rd, E from XJH
Park Hotel
Bund Centre

Parks:

  1. People's Park, on NJ Road
  2. Jing'an Park, across from temple, NJ Road
  3. Fuqing Park, just off Huahai Lu
  4. Huangpu Park, N end of the Bund

Shopping etc.

  1. Xintiandi, a bit E of Fuqing Park
  2. Tianzifang, I'm not sure where
  3. Qipu Lu, in Zhabei

Then there are temples, other attractions like the Pearl Tower in Pudong (I find it remarkably ugly, but it is an attraction), hotels (Peace Hotel at Bund & NJ Road is a landmark), and other stuff. Pashley (talk) 23:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

My guess is such a map should concentrate on the overall layout & features useful in navigation: rivers, subway routes, major streets, district boundaries since district names are usually given in addresses. Hotels, restaurants and attractions can mostly be left for the district maps. Exceptions are ones that are landmarks — Jing'an Temple, Yuyuan Gardens, conspicuous things like Bund Centre, Park Hotel and Pearl Tower. Pashley (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Policy question for listing[edit]

The municipal government runs a site [Shanghai Cultural Information] which has good listings of current stuff, everything from acrobatic shows at the circus to special exhibits at museums and public galleries, plus musicians on tour, plays, etc. I therefore want to list it; it is a useful resource and covers things that change too fast for us to cover, and it is run by the local gov't so it is close to our "primary source" criterion.

On the other hand, it is also a booking engine and policy says don't list those. I'm therefore asking here rather than just putting it in, What do others think?

In a somewhat similar case (but no booking engine), I already added the Encyclopedia of Shanghai at Shanghai#Understand. Any comment on that? Pashley (talk) 15:10, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

We've always struggled with how to include good event guides while excluding the vast majority of questionable "guides", and Wikivoyage talk:External links has a number of discussions on the subject. There was a past discussion about marking some links as "approved exceptions to policy" after consensus was reached to include them, but unfortunately that never materialized.
IMHO, when a link is very clearly useful, is not leading to additional questionable links being added, and an argument has been made for its inclusion, I'm more than happy to leave it be despite existing policy (see Talk:Davis (California) for a similar example - the link in question has been in the article for several years now). In this case, if someone raises an issue then the link would need to be removed in accordance with policy, but provided it doesn't lead to a lot of additional spammy links I wouldn't personally feel any need to remove it. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Why don't you be bold and change the policy page so that some links can be "approved exceptions to policy" if consensus is reached on the article discussion page to include them, Ryan/Pashley? -- Alice 16:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
My understanding was that the "approved exceptions" bit was already something we agreed upon, and have been acting accordingly in my writing and advice to others! Could we discreetly slap up a consensus tag in the discussion, instead of, erm, marketing the possibility to marketers previously deterred by our policy? --Peter Talk 07:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't think we need any more "secret policies"; better to document accepted and consensual practices - although I do sympathise with wishing to avoid linkspam. -- Alice 21:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
I see no objections above, so I'm about to add it. Pashley (talk) 18:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

French Concession[edit]

I'm just wondering if the article for the 'French Concession' should be called that? I understand that many foreigners in Shanghai refer to the area like that, however I think some Chinese would not be happy to hear it called as such? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I did think about this while doing the recent re-districting (see #District_changes.3F above), and I concluded that we need to keep the name. Policy is to use the commonest English name and "French Concession" is certainly that, at least among foreigners in Shanghai.
We could do separate articles for Shanghai/Xuhui and Shanghai/Luwan, both now redirects to French Concession. Currently Xuhui is the only official district without an article. (Some districts have two since we split Pudong/Nanhui and Huangpu/Old Town.) But Xuhui and Luwan have much in common; both articles would need to mention they were part of the old Concession. Some of the major streets run through both. Also, Luwan District no longer officially exists; for administrative purposes it has been merged into Huangpu.
Just having an article for Xuhui and moving the Luwan stuff into the Huangpu article does not really work. The Luwan area (West of the Old Town & formerly French) is distinct from what we now cover in Shanghai/Huangpu (North of the Old Town & formerly British) in many ways. It needs either its own article or inclusion in a French Concession article.
I think it is fine as is. Pashley (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the thinking behind this. Good for the record in case someone else asks. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
The current situation is very unclear, because French Concession is not on the map, and the administrative districts are listed next to the map. I think the Districtions section should look more like Chicago#Districts or New Orleans#Districts, and the map should show Wikivoyage districts instead of administrative ones for clarity. Globe-trotter (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
It's at least a little less confusing right now, because I didn't even realize there was a French Concession district when I was trying to make the map! --Peter Talk 09:05, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
The map shows the official district Xuhui, but the text beside it has:
  • Xuhui (徐汇区; Xúhuìqū) The central district of the French Concession, with a fine cathedral and other religious buildings, now a major shopping area with many up-market highrise buildings, both residential and office.
The French Concession article explains the districts (third paragraph of lead section) and has a map showing the old concession. I thought that was clear enough. Do others disagree? Pashley (talk) 13:46, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
I think having the article name to the side makes it pretty easy to miss. I'm kind of a good test case, since I come from a starting point of knowing nothing about the city. I am only realizing right now that Xuhui and the French Concession are the same thing. I think I should change the map to show French Concession instead of Xuhui, unless we want to rename the article to Xuhui. There's enough space on the map, anyway, to put Xuhui under the name in parentheses. And I'd also like to show the Old City. --Peter Talk 05:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Xuhui & the French Concession are not the same thing, so renaming the article Xuhui does not work. Compare the maps at Shanghai#Districts & Shanghai/French Concession. The area now referred to as "the French concession" includes Luwan. Historically, there was "French Bund" too, but that can be ignored I think.
Changing the map to show the French Concession & the Old Town is probably the right thing to do. Pashley (talk) 12:34, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
That's kind of a bigger problem, though. Where do we write about content that is in Xuhui, but not in the French Concession? --Peter Talk 17:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the Concession included all of Xuhui, so that poblem cannot arise. Pashley (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Universities[edit]

There has been the addition of content for universities to the article that I do not believe is relevant for the visitor to Shanghai.

How should universities be listed? I feel each university should only be included in the 'Learn' section if it offers a relevant course for the visitor (such as Mandarin). I do not believe listing universities for students (international or domestic) is relevant to WikiVoyage.

Any comments? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the version I wrote & that you have just reverted to is fine, though it could likely be expanded. There are unis in Shanghai we do not mention yet, though I think we have all the big ones.
The version you reverted from was OK too, though I'd debate the details. It had Fudan as China's #3 uni after two in Beijing, Beida & Tsinghua. I'd sooner say Beida & Fudan are the top two general unis, Tsinghau & Jiaoda the top two engineering schools. (I may be biased; I worked at Jiaoda.) Someone else might want to add that Tongji (Shanghai/Yangpu#See) is also a top school, or claim my "top two" lists should be top three with maybe Zhongshan U in Guangzhou and CUST in Hefei added. The exact choice of details does not matter a lot, though mentioning that certain schools are prestigious seems worthwhile. (Chinese were certainly impressed by a Jiaoda business card, for example.)
It is not just Mandarin courses that are relevant. Some travellers are looking for jobs Teaching English, or looking for info on a uni area where they have a job offer. Others want the uni area for cheap restaurants & bars, or a chance to meet English-speaking students.
Also, there are courses taught in English; there's an MBA emphasizing foreign trade at a uni in Pudong and Jiaoda has a summer course for European Masters degree students that leads to internships in China. As I see it, international students, such as the large numbers of Africans at Chinese unis, are travellers so providing a bit of background for them is OK. Not a high priority, but worth doing where we can. Pashley (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Number of foreign students in China was about 250,000 as of 2010, expected to reach a million by 2020. [2] Pashley (talk) 13:35, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree that Shanghai is becoming a very important international student destination, however I still query whether this information belongs in WikiVoyage. Wikipedia itself has a whole article devoted to this very subject! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_in_Shanghai and I would say that should be the place to look up such information. That isn't to say Universities should not be listed.. for example in the city of Busan in Korea the PNU is listed mainly because of the vibrant nightlife and shopping around it, thereby becoming a relevant travel destination. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I am really asking if we can make all content for Wikivoyage relevant for travellers, and more encyclopedic information into Wikipedia itself --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I could see cutting down the amount of info here quite a bit if we can add a link to the WP article. However, my understanding of current policy at Wikivoyage:External_links#What_not_to_link_to & Wikipedia#When_to_link is that we should not use such links. Is this case an exception? Pashley (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I will admit that I don't really know :) If we link then we break policy, however if we don't link then we replicate content... The more I think about this it seems to affect many new general articles in Wikivoyage (such as 'airlines' and 'train travel') which are also already addressed (better) in Wikipedia. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the answer in the meantime is to ensure we write about educational institutions in a way that describes them as potential travel destinations, rather than 'University X is regarded better then University Y'. I admit I have little knowledge of Shanghai universities (I only ever visit on business) however I am sure there is something interesting to write about each university and the surrounding area. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I think that we will need to debate this issue as a matter of policy because there seems to be inconsistency between different city articles. The Tokyo and Beijing articles do go into a lot of detail regarding university listing. I think what we really need to determine is whether international students are considered to be travellers (according to most countries' immigration laws, they are), or should we restrict the definition to travellers to just tourists and business visitors on short trips. The dog2 (talk) 04:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
There has been some policy discussion around related issues. See Wikivoyage_talk:What_is_an_article?#Scope. Pashley (talk) 13:34, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
I only just got around to reading the discussion, and although it is an interesting read it doesn't actually provide a conclusion in what is the scope of an article. I think the question is similar (i.e. are people getting married in China considered travellers?) and I agree that scope should be restricted to travel related topics, not about anything that could happen to people who go to foreign countries.
I could say that listing all the electronics factories in the Shanghai region is relevant to me and my travelling, and I'm sure everyone would disagree :) --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
On the other hand, a tour of an electronics factory might be interesting, so it could be reasonable to list factories that give tours under "See" for the relevant place. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
A tour of an electronics factory would be relevant to a tourist (similar to a ship building tour in Geoji in Korea). My opinion is that universities should be listed if they meet a similar criteria for general travelers rather than students specifically going to university in a foreign country. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Policy is also to list universities if they provide brief courses for non-matriculated students. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Using the maglev train[edit]

One thing not clear to me from the article (and actually google as well) is when is it actually a good idea to use the Maglev train? (from a time and/or cost perspective)

For example, if I am staying in a central area like Xintiandi, is it better to take a taxi all the way to Pudong airport, or is it worth to take a taxi to the Maglev station and then take the train? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Some hotels provide a free shuttle bus. Apart from that, the cheapest way will be metro, 6 or 8 rmb and reasonably quick, but it won't work well at rush hour or with a lot of luggage. From Xintiandi, a bit of a walk to the station and two train changes; line 1 or 10, change to 2, then there's a change between parts of line 2 (easy, trains on opposite sides of same platform). Metro then maglev bumps the cost to 50 or so & is faster, same number of changes.
Taxi might be 150; in many cases it would be worth paying for the convenience. Taxi then maglev strikes me as odd, fairly high cost but you still have to haul your luggage onto a train. Faster transit time, but add time to pick up ticket and wait for next train and it may not be much faster overall. Pashley (talk) 11:25, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Is it reasonable to conclude that unless you are staying in Pudong then it just isn't worth it? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Sleep Prices[edit]

In the Shanghai sleep category we have the following ranges:

This guide uses the following price ranges for a standard double room:
Budget ¥120-250
Mid-range ¥250-500
Splurge ¥500-3000


It is just me, or are these prices now out of date? I would say 'splurging' on RMB 500 in Shanghai is very difficult!

Can I suggest the following?

This guide uses the following price ranges for a standard double room:
Budget ¥200-400
Mid-range ¥400-1000
Splurge ¥1,000-4,000


--Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Nudge --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Makes sense. I would put the midrange/splurge boundary at 800 rather than 1000, but it is almost a year since I've been there and I don't travel splurge class so I'll defer to your judgment on that. Pashley (talk) 11:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I think Shanghai (and Beijing actually) is somewhat special for hotels since the difference between the most cheap and most expensive accommodation is really big compared to other cities. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Archive old discussions?[edit]

I'm finding the Shanghai 'Talk' page fairly unwieldy, with a lot of sections of discussion that ended before the migration to WikiVoyage.

Can I move any none current discussions to archives, in the same way as Talk:United_States_of_America ? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. Pashley (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
OK, done. I wanted to archive "Shanghai districts" discussion since it is very long and started in 2009. However last comment was in May 2013 so I felt that I should leave it. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Smog?[edit]

I have seen several recent news stories about fairly awful air pollution in & around Shanghai, e.g. [3] [4].

Do we need a warning here? Or for some larger region? A link to reliable current info? I'd say reliable implies not Chinese gov't. see for example [5]. Pashley (talk) 14:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

The smog has been pretty bad here, and if you were visiting then you basically would not leave the hotel over the last weekend. However consensus from Shanhaiesee is that this was pretty exceptional and that they hope this is not the new normal. A warning may be premature at this stage because we don't know if it is going to happen again.
That said, there probably should be a more prominent warning on the China article itself. This is because in Shnaghai the government is able to take some limited action, whereas 'tier 2' cities such as Harbin basically have to put up with it.
Also it seems the Chinese government is being more open about the problem this time around. The bigger problem is that the American embassey only publishes their (considered more accurate) pollution readings on twitter, which is not of great use to most people in China because it is blocked. http://aqicn.org/city/shanghai/ however is accessible and seems to have accurate readings. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Please see China#Smog Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Added references to China article in Shanghai#Stay healthy Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:01, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?[edit]

Banner currently used in this article
Suggested new alternative banner

I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The second is really nice, well done! While not bad, the first is a little dull in comparison to the second. James Atalk 12:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Yup, the second one is really a great choice! PrinceGloria (talk) 14:33, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Wonderful job on the new banner! Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Clear improvement. Go ahead. Danapit (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I am probably just gilding the lily at this point, but the second banner is a vast improvement over the first. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Proposed Syced (talk) 07:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Merge Zhabei and Jing'an?[edit]

I just noticed that the Jing'an map looked rather strange. On investigation it is because Wikipedia reported an official merge of Zhabei and Jing'an on November 2015. See w:Jing'an_District.

Now, the Wikivoyage districts don't have to follow the official districts, but over time our guide will become out of synch. Should we consider merging too? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds sensible to me. I did the last round of district changes & while I think the current list is much better than what we had before (see Talk:Shanghai/Districts.old), I'm open to further change if there's a good argument for it. This one is almost a no-brainer. Pashley (talk) 11:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I lost track of this. It seems still like a good idea, but I might just see where the discussion underneath goes first. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh what a mess![edit]

I have just been to Shanghai and this collection of articles were of little help given how intricate and unnecessarily complex the structure of it is. We have drill-downs up to three levels down from what is supposedly a city article, and we have more than 7+/-2 districts within this level. Moreover, quite a few districts require long-winded explanations about how they are not what they are supposed to be and do not correspond to the map...

I would move to:

  1. Treat the administrative entity of Shanghai as a region, rather than a city, as this is what it really is by general standards
  2. Make Puxi + Lujiazui into a city article called e.g. Shanghai City
  3. Reorganize districts in both into logical, easy-to-navigate entities (comments on those in due course as we reorganize)

Anybody in favour? PrinceGloria (talk) 03:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Inner Shanghai (current)
I completely agree that it is a mess, but then again Shanghai in reality is a big crazy mess :) Pinging User:Pashley since he has worked a great deal on this as well.
I lived there for over a year, and didn't try to make too many structural changes since the districts, although disorganized, did seem to make sense.
The Shanghai inner districts do make a city all by themselves, so I'm OK to change the outer districts to a region.
Out of interest, did you refer to this WV article before your visit? It might provide valuable insight. Thanks --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:32, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I tried to, and the article did not make any sense to me before I went to the city. After a week in, I now can only say that the way we sliced and diced Shanghai makes it difficult to digest.
Of course "locals" like you will feel it's oversimplifying, but to me the centre is pretty much three districts:
  1. People's Square + Nanjing + Bund (+ maybe the Old Town, forgot about it when initially writing as I found it so disappointing...)
  2. Lujiazui
  3. French Concession
Everything else is a tad "whatever", as there are only scattered individual attractions that would make you go further than those. So perhaps "Outer Puxi" and "Outer Pudong" would do. PrinceGloria (talk) 10:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Shanghai districts are tough. I created most of the structure we now have, mostly following the official administrative structure. What we had before that is archived at Talk:Shanghai/Districts.old & the discussion is either on this page or in its archive.
I like the idea of making Shanghai Municipality (currently a redirect) into a region. I think everything now under Shanghai#Downtown would go in the "Shanghai City" article, though. Pashley (talk) 11:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Basically no disagreements at all (including comment on Old Town, although pretty much every tourist has to visit). People's Square + Nanjing Road East + Bund + Old Town all make good sense to group together. Pudong is not well served by its current standalone article, so a split between Lujiazui and 'Outer Pudong' sounds good.
Where would 'Jing'an' fit in? As discussed above it has now grown administratively to cover Zhabei as well. I think it should merge and remain separate, not bundled with French Concession. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
If we turn the inner districts on the map above, plus Liuzhazui (are there other areas of central Pudong that should be included?) into a "Shanghai City" or "Central Shanghai" article, Jing'an is included. Pashley (talk) 12:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I found only Lujiazui to feel like a part of the city centre. With regard to Jing'an, the riverine border makes it quite apparently separate from Zhabei to a traveller, I see no benefit in reflecting the administrative change. That said, I see benefit in merging Zhabei, Jing'an, Putuo and Changning - that would give the resulting article a critical mass of POIs, which could then be grouped under subheadings pertaining to the few clusters existing within those districts. PrinceGloria (talk) 13:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Probably only the Lujiazui part of Pudong should go into "Central Shanghai".
How about a 'North' district with Zhabei, Hongkou and Yangpu ? Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Shanghai/Changning as well, I think.
I do not like the idea of a "North" district within a "Central Shanghai" article, if that is what you are suggesting; it seems contrary to the idea of creating a simple article for the really central areas.
I'd be in favour of "Central Shanghai" and "North Central Shanghai" articles, but I'd want to keep most or all the existing district articles, linked from those and/or from Shanghai Municipality turned into a region article. Pashley (talk) 05:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
As a first-time visitor to Shanghai who had tried to use this guide, I am precisely against it. Shanghai is a huge and intricate city with... very little to see, admittedly (comparatively for a city of that size of course). Most attractions are to be found in the three core areas identified above, and the outer districts hold precious little, plus the distinction between each of them is discernible and important only to locals who care about administrative divisions. We need to group together the districts to explain how visiting Shanghai works, not how the city was spliced by the authorities. PrinceGloria (talk) 05:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I took a first cut at User:Pashley/Central_Shanghai. Comments?
I think it would be much easier to cover downtown without including Liujiazui, though I included it in my test edits. Moving Liujiazui here also leaves us with a problem; there is a lot of Pudong that is neither Liujiazui nor Nanhui; what do we do with that? Pashley (talk) 07:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Very nice, and much clearer. Since there is a further Central Shanghai within the area you called Central Shanghai, how about "Shanghai City" as the name? With regard to Pudong, it should remain with its own article covering everything but Liujiazui IMHO. PrinceGloria (talk) 07:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I dislike the idea of calling an article "Shanghai City" since I think that would be confusing in relation to "Shanghai Municipality".
The current Pudong article could mostly move to "Liujiazui", though it would then need editing. I'd keep Nanhui since that is a commonly used term and a distinct area, even though that article is pretty skeletal. I'd then make Pudong a redirect to a section of Shanghai Municipality.
I am travelling & have other projects, so I am not likely to do any of this soon. Pashley (talk) 08:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
My take on the latter would be to merge the rest of Pudong with Nanhui, as regardless of the common use of the term, the attractions in both are sparse save for Luijazui, so maintaining two separate articles is unnecessary. We can call it Pudong and Nanhui.
With regard to the former, I am for Shanghai as the "regional" and Shanghai City as the "city" article, reflecting the reality - Shanghai municipality as such does NOT cover a city, but a city with many suburbs and other townships. Same as New York (state) and New York City. PrinceGloria (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
User:Andrewssi2, User:Pashley, can we take it further not to lose momentum? I was wondering whom else to invite to participate in this discussion, but it seems that outside of you two no other users have been making substantial contributions to this article in recent months... So it seems like we need to reach consensus between us 3. PrinceGloria (talk) 06:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry! I was mindful of this discussion, but I've been flat out at work last couple weeks (as my editing history will attest to).
A consensus between 3 is not bad by WV standards, so happy to pick this up again now. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
The relation between Central Shanghai and Shanghai Municipality is much more like that of NYC to Metro New York than NYC to the state. We don't need a Metro Shanghai article, since the region already has an official name, Shanghai Municipality. A redirect Metro->Municipality could be added, but I think that's pointless.
I think Nanhui must remain separate. "Nanhui & Pudong" is confusing because Nanhui is part of the official Pudong New Area. Just having one article for all of that area & calling it Pudong might work, but not well since the districts within it are large, populous and quite distinct. Nanhui's a million people & over half the land area in Pudong New Area.
I do not think "Shanghai City" works since it is both confusing in relation to S Municipality and hard to define with no clear boundary. To me, Central Shanghai is a much better name. I would not object much to a redirect City->Central, though I would consider it pointless, but I do object to S City as an actual article title. Pashley (talk) 10:50, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
OK, so how about agreeing on Shanghai/Pudong New Area and Central Shanghai then? PrinceGloria (talk) 11:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Pudong New Area sounds good, but what about Central Shanghai? Which districts are being suggested to fit into it? Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:10, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
A Pudong New Area article seems pointless to me; it is a huge administrative region that is mostly of little interest to travellers. Mention it in the Municipality article, maybe add a redirect from Pudong New Area to a section there, & we're done.
The existing Pudong article is a mess. We certainly need at least one of Liujiazui or Central Pudong to have an article, possibly both. Pashley (talk) 00:30, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I'd make Central Shanghai identical to the "Inner Districts" on the map above, with a prominent link to Liujiazui across the river. Pashley (talk) 00:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I am not really a big fan of "prominent links". Either Lujiazui is a city district or it's not - and to me, it very much is, one of the most important districts of central Shanghai in the present day. Pudong does not really have "districts" worth separate guides besides it, so if we left it out of the "city guide" scope, it would be something of an orphan. PrinceGloria (talk) 02:34, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed change[edit]

So how is this?

  • Move the existing Shanghai article to Shanghai Municipality, leaving a redirect which can later be changed into a disambig.
  • Make the Municipality article a region.
  • Create Central Puxi covering the areas in the "Inner Districts" on the map above.
  • Move a bunch of text from the Municipality article into Central Puxi.
  • Move the existing Pudong article to Central Pudong. Change the Lujiazui redirect to point there.
  • Make Pudong a disambig between Central Pudong & Nanhui.
  • Make Shanghai a disambig which links to Central Puxi & Central Pudong for downtown & the Municipality article for everything else.
  • Keep existing region articles. Adjust breadcrumbs to point either to Municipality or to Central Puxi.

Shanghai is complicated enough that there is likely no ideal solution; the above is the best I can do. I think the first two points are definitely required improvements, the rest open to discussion.

Comments? Pashley (talk) 13:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

That is a first cut that could be done fairly straightforwardly. After it is done, we can discuss whether some or all of Changning, Putuo, Zhabei, Hongkou & Yangpu are non-central enough they should be moved out of the Central Puxi article and just linked from the municipality like Minhang & other suburbs. I'm inclined to say no, but it would be worth discussing. Pashley (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
See User:Pashley/Shanghai_Municipality for what I would do with the first few sections (intro, Districts, Understand) of the top-level article. Most of the rest of the current Shanghai article (Get in, ..., Go next) should be added there or moved into the Downtown Puxi article.
I think the result could just be left at Shanghai and the current redirect from S Municipality left in place. Alternately we could make the result the Municipality article & make Shanghai either a redirect there or a disambig page with links to the Municipality, Downtown Puxi and Downtown Pudong. Pashley (talk) 18:05, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Meanwhile I have plunged forward some on Pudong articles, albeit a bit differently than I suggested above. I modified the Pudong article, created Shanghai/Downtown Pudong as a redirect to that, and created Shanghai/Pudong New Area as a disambig page. Comment or other contributions solicited.

It would be useful to have a map for the Pudong article; more-or-less the map in Shanghai/Pudong New Area minus the one at Shanghai/Nanhui. Any volunteers? Pashley (talk) 21:04, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts on this. I am rather unfamiliar with Pudong (not sure why.. apart from the airport I had little reason to go there). Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:17, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Me too. I worked & lived in Minhang and shopped, drank, etc. mostly in downtown Puxi. Pashley (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

I am now plunging forward on the Puxi side, modifying Shanghai, creating Shanghai/Downtown, adjusting breadcrumbs to point to it, and adding a redirect at Shanghai/Downtown Puxi. The Dowtown article will need a lot of work & I may run out of steam without doing it all. Pashley (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Could the article be called something without a "/". Districts of districts does not look good in breadcrumbs. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
You're right. I'll move it to Downtown Shanghai. Pashley (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I have now run out of steam, will not look at it again for a week or so. Other contributions would be good. The only glaring gap I am aware of is that Downtown_Shanghai#Get_around is woefully incomplete.
User:PrinceGloria: I realise this does not combine Lujiahui and central Puxi as you wanted; that made no sense to me. It also does not cut Downtown Shanghai to as small an area as you suggested; that might be done later. However, I think I've addressed some of your concerns. What do you think? Pashley (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Line 5?[edit]

For the extension of w:Line 5, Shanghai Metro south into Fengxian, WP says construction started in 2014 & is expected to finish in 2017. That is odd; it looked almost complete to me when I left Shanghai in late 2012. However, I only saw the part in Minhang and the bridge, not the parts in Fengxian.

I also heard that a northern extension to Hongqiao Airport was planned, but saw no construction for that. Neither WP's map nor the one on the metro system's site currently shows either extension as operational.

Has anyone got up-to-date info? Pashley (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)