User talk:(WT-en) LADave

Welcome

Hi LADave - thanks for your contributions to the Nepal articles. However, I have unfortunately had to revert your edits as they contradicted the official data. Please take a look: [1] and [2]. Anyway, please keep contributing and if you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Also, you might find it useful to check out the following info articles on this page: Project:Help. Take it easy. (WT-en) WindHorse 18:35, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

Hi again, if want to make any drastic changes, as renaming a city or region, please state the reason for the change either in the summary box at the foot of the page or on the article discussion page. Without this info, there is a strong possibility that your edits will be reverted. Thanks. (WT-en) WindHorse 18:43, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

Disambiguation

Disambiguation can be a bit tricky. Copying content loses the article history, so it's generally better to use the "move" tab to rename an article. See Project:How_to_rename_a_page and Project:Article naming conventions#Disambiguation for details. And for what it's worth, I goofed this up a few times when I first started editing here :) -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:14, 2 June 2007 (EDT)

Massachusetts Stay safe section

I do appreciate your efforts on Massachusetts. I wonder, though, why this:

"Watch for aggressive and careless driving at intersections including running red lights, also unsignaled lane changes. Speeds up to 20 mph (30 kph) over posted limits are common on highways and interstates. Pedestrians should not count on getting the right of way, no matter what the law says. Drinking is a common social activity and intoxicated drivers are on the road evenings after work or almost anytime on weekends. "

My experience is that most of this is true in most states. Pedestrians should never "count on" getting the right of way anywhere. Drunk driving is a problem everywhere. I understand that Massachusetts has a bad rep for driving (RI is far worse), but I think a general statement to that effect is sufficient. Warnings to people from other countries/cultures belong on the USA page. (WT-en) OldPine 13:58, 2 June 2007 (EDT)

Nepal

The new district designations are very practical and helpful, and as a frequent visitor to Nepal, your efforts are appreciated. It should be a final goal, however, to produce a totally new hierarchy to replace the government designated zones, and so we could keep the information on the front page short and succinct (like perhaps Bhutan or even India). Do think we could use your list as it stands? It needs to be kept to no more than nine places max (which it is). Under this hierarchy, where are the Solu Khumbu and Dolpo regions. Presumably they are classified under Himalaya? This article might be helpful: Project:Geographical hierarchy#Regions. Maybe some of the more popular tourist areas could be mentioned in the blurb. What do you think? However, I replaced the dab for Pashupatinath and Dakshinkali as these are just temple complexes, not destinations with hotels like Boudhanath. Please see: Project:What is an article?. Anyway, thanks for all your input. Your practical knowledge is very helpful. So, at the moment, do you want to replace the original list with your new hierarchy? That is fine with me. We can tweak as we go along. (WT-en) WindHorse 01:09, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

Nepal#cities

Hi Dave, thanks for continuing to add your knowledge and insights to the Nepal page. It is looking good. However, Wikivoyage has a policy that lists of places (cities, other destinations etc) should not exceed nine, and so I have removed 4 of the places you recently added to the list. Sorry about that. Anyway, please check to see if you agree with my choice of deletions. The cities that are listed should be chosen by their popularity with tourists, and is drawn up to give them easy access to info, like an index. It is not a promotion of places. Obviously, KTM, Pokhara, Patan, Bhaktapur and Namche Bazaar should be listed, but the others are open. Also, the info on the front page should be kept succinct (see India and Bhutan as examples), and more in depth info should be placed on the actual articles themselves. Anyway, thanks for all your efforts. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or one of the regular contributors. Take it easy. (WT-en) WindHorse 21:08, 8 June 2007 (EDT) Ps. you might find the info on this page of use: Project:Manual of style

Hi Dave. I have replied on the Nepal Talk Page. (WT-en) WindHorse 21:32, 9 June 2007 (EDT)

New regions - Nepal

Hi Dave, I have left a comment under (WT-en) WindHorse 00:23, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Hi Dave - I've left another comment on Talk:Nepal#New regions. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look. Thanks. (WT-en) WindHorse 09:44, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

The priority at the moment is that the new regions get tabbed and new articles with these names are started. Please see new comments. Thanks (WT-en) WindHorse 23:18, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

HI Dave, we have got a lot of Nepalese districts lost in the system at the moment. So to save all your edits being reverted (which would be real shame), I'd be grateful if you could reply to my last request on the Nepal Talk page please. As I said over there, we need to combine the river basins under collective headings - such as 'Eastern Nepalese river basins', and then we need to clearly define the districts that they incorporate and add the main centers of population. Anyway, the new hierarchy looks great, but I'm not quite sure why you are showing reticence to establishing links to these new regional titles. Is it because you haven't got round to it or perhaps you don't agree with the idea or what...? Anyway, I'd be grateful for some indication of your intentions. Thanks a lot. Your efforts are a appreciated and will definitely enhance the quality of the Nepal article when completed. Take it easy. (WT-en) WindHorse 05:52, 13 June 2007 (EDT)