User talk:(WT-en) Asterix

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

San Francisco districts[edit]

Well, it's been over a week since we put up our proposal and no one has really commented on it. Should we just get cracking with the districts, or should we wait a little longer? (WT-en) PerryPlanet 17:20, 7 April 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I noticed that - I'm not sure what the lack of comments means (good or bad?)- Anyway, personally I'd rather just get cracking on it to be's been a while and I have some stuff coming up soon. I guess in the abscence of other votes on this, the two of us would probably constitute a consensus?? Besides, it has been hovering around 30 districts for ages now (like a year or something), so whatever we do it's going to be a big improvement. So what has to be done????
From my perspective, it looks like you guys are definitely tackling this in the right fashion. If I knew anything about San Francisco, I'd chime in ;) Anyway, the massive Chicago districts discussion was pretty much just done by (WT-en) Gorilla Jones and me—I'd say having a consensus between the two of you is good stuff to work from. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:32, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
Awesome, cause I've just been itching to get started. I'll jump in around tonight, when I've got some more spare time on my hands. By the way Asterix, I love what you've been doing with some of the district articles. Fisherman's Wharf was an utter mess just a week ago, but thanks to you it looks fantastic now! Very neat and ordered, fits the MoS wonderfully. (WT-en) PerryPlanet 15:57, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

The deed is done. After about an hour of edits, we've gone from 33 to the current 14 districts. And I've added a new districts map with some of the major roads too, so that the boundaries of our new districts are relatively easy to figure out.

Of course, all I really did was merge the existing district articles, so while our districts problem is over, we now have a bit of a mess in most of the new articles where certain information (such as the stuff in the "Get in" section) correlates with the neighborhood it was attached to, rather than the new district article. So now we'll have to spend some time fixing that up, but overall it looks like the transition might go smoothly! :D (WT-en) PerryPlanet 00:42, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Yes, great job with the Map PerryPlanet! Over the next couple of days I will try to help clean up at least some of the potential problems that you have referred to. It looks like the issues will consist of:
  • 'Get In'/'Get Out' Sections - (as you mention), need to be rewritten in places to reflect the fact that they now refer to Districts and not Neighborhoods.
  • 'see' 'do' 'eat' 'sleep' 'buy' 'drink' sections etc will have to be checked for potential duplications.
  • some of the 'understand' narratives may have to be rejigged a bit
But honestly, from what I have seen I think that these issues are pretty minor.
Again, great job. (WT-en) Asterix 12:58, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Hi again, just a thought...I am working from the top of the list downwards and doing a quick check for the points I listed above. Perhaps someone else can start from the bottom?? FYI - right now I am down to the fourth district from the top(Chinatown-North Beach) seems to be pretty easy...just small changes required really. (WT-en) Asterix 14:05, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

Hey, that's a good idea. I'll do just that, starting with Southeast San Francisco. (WT-en) PerryPlanet 17:29, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
ok, so I did the first 9 districts. (WT-en) Asterix 17:55, 9 April 2008 (EDT)

actually, I think PerryPlanet had already done some of my wonder I thought it was so easy!! :) So anyway, I think that this is coming along really well. It looks like the 'validity checking' or 'sense checking' part is over. I would like to suggest just a few more things to finish this off;

  • Can we add a short statement under the Districts heading on the SF Main Page? Something like..

The map is predominantly based on the 11 official governmental Districts of San Francisco, but it has been adapted to suit the purposes of this guide. Some Districts have been merged together and others have been broken up into popular neighborhood groupings.

  • I wonder does the outline look a little sparse?? I love the way that we have 14 headings and 14 articles, but maybe we could add a short narritive under each URL heading?? Or perhaps just a list of the neighborhoods (maybe including parks or even attractions etc??) that come under the respective districts. It would be like an At a Glance section and would help the tourist understand what they will get to when the click on the respective links.
  • Looking at it - PerryPlanet added some very useful geographical descriptions of each District at the top of each page. But, I wonder would it be better to also copy up some of whats in the the 'understand' section too. I am basing this on what I think will look good and what I read about the top section here [1]???

Your thoughts...

P.S. I'm copying this over to the SF Discussion page to continue it there...seems like more people will see it there. (WT-en) Asterix 13:40, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

Fisherman's Wharf[edit]

Sorry if you took offense over my brusque edits at San Francisco/Fisherman's Wharf. Your contributions weren't nuked, I just moved them over to Get in -- see the Talk page for a more detailed explanation.

Please keep hacking away at SF, and do drop me a line at jani(at) if you might be interested in turning this into a guidebook. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:55, 16 April 2008 (EDT)


Have fun with your promotion! :) Fortunately for me, the school semester ends in a couple of weeks, so I'll have even more time to devote to the San Francisco articles very soon. Anyway, if you're going to be leaving Wikivoyage for a while, I'd like to thank you for all the amazing contributions you've made, and I hope you'll come back soon! (WT-en) PerryPlanet 15:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

Chinatown-North Beach[edit]

Good to have you back! Anyway, I think Chinatown-North Beach is looking close to star quality, in terms of format. Minor things like prices for restaurants will need to be added and an overall check on grammar and spelling is in order to make sure everything looks just perfect.

In terms of content though, I'm not sure how good the article is. Other than climbing Telegraph Hill and passing by on the Hyde Street cable car, I didn't really penetrate the district. Fisherman's Wharf I was able to thoroughly explore, so I was very confident in making that article a star. Still, it certainly looks like there's enough on Chinatown-NB. If you're familiar with the district and you feel like it has enough, then that's good enough for me. :) (WT-en) PerryPlanet 12:52, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, now that you mention it, I think that I should put down some more listings before I nominate it. i'll work on it. Thanks (WT-en) Asterix 17:31, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
Additionally, I would recommend you take a look at the discussion that took place when I nominated Fisherman's Wharf for star. Mostly it was positive, and we reached a consensus by the end (if we hadn't, it wouldn't be a star), but there were a few style issues that came up which had to be resolved. One was the "average price" for hotels (which I also see a bit of on the Chinatown-NB article), another one was duplicate listings (like Pier 39 being listed three times). So you'll want to look over that and fix them so that they don't come up again when you nominate Chinatown-NB. (WT-en) PerryPlanet 19:37, 9 July 2008 (EDT)
Yes, I just finished reading that page...Not too bad though I think - considering how quickly it was cobbled together, seemed like the stuff was all minor except for the 'Average Price' issue...speaking of which...where do I find the price ranges for the hotels???? (WT-en) Asterix 16:12, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Best way to do it is to go to the hotel website, find the "reservations" page, type in the info (remember, the price range is for a double room) and see what comes up. Usually there will be a bunch of rooms offered and the prices will be listed. You'll also want to try different dates (like off-season/on-season) to see if there's a change in rates and take that into account. Personally, I never include the special deals (like for AAA members or the like), just the standard rate (sometimes they call it the "best available rate") the hotel lists. From that, you get your price range. :)
Also, if you have trouble figuring out which category (budget, mid-range, splurge) to put a hotel, just stick it under the category that fits the majority of prices listed. For instance, say the price range is $150-$300, which for the Chinatown-NB article would cover both "mid-range" price levels and "splurge" price levels. If the majority of rooms don't get above $200 (like there's only two suites that cost more than that), then put it under mid-range. But if the majority of rooms do go above $200, then stick it under splurge. (WT-en) PerryPlanet 16:27, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Hey there, I made some changes and now I am much more confident about this. I need to proof read it once more, but I think its nearly there...what do u think? Think maybe it could do with another photo or two (or maybe its ok?) Oh, any chance I can interest u in updating the map..i don't know how. (WT-en) Asterix 14:59, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Tenderloin neighborhoods[edit]

Would you like me to put up a colored neighborhoods key on the map? I could whip that up in a jiff. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:26, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

that would be cool, thanks. I'll fix up the 'Drink' section (as your rightly mentioned) over the next few days and then I think it'll be done. (WT-en) Asterix 17:48, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
Done. Please check over it to make sure the neighborhood color regions align with your intentions—I don't have a clue about this place! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:53, 20 August 2008 (EDT)
I know confusing huh?? Thanks for doing this, just some fine tuning left. I'll get to it later as I am going to add a couple of bars etc, and will have to edit the map again anyway. (WT-en) Asterix 14:37, 21 August 2008 (EDT)

Golden Gate star[edit]

Now technically, you starified that article ~50 minutes before 14 days were up. Regardless, I'll leave a critique on the talk page ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:54, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

User page protection[edit]

Hello again, always hoping that you will come back—your presence here is sorely missed! To the point though, for some reason your uncreated user page has become a spam magnet (presumably because they target uncreated pages that have a high number of links pointing towards them), so we have created a blank one and protected it (we can't protect an uncreated page). If you want that protection removed and/or the page deleted, just let me know. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:21, 1 May 2009 (EDT)