Talk:Cumbria

Duplication with Lake District

I'd posit that "Lake District" is the more common English name for this area. --(WT-en) Evan 11:47, 13 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Lake District is in Cumbria (WT-en) Wojsyl 03:21, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)

Yeah. Not the same thing, but they overlap quite closely. As a tourist you tend to talk about visiting the lake district, but to have complete coverage with our geographical heirarchy, we need to have this 'Cumbria' page.

Trouble is there will be a lot of duplication between the two pages. In fact at the current time, this page is very sparse, and I'm thinking we could pretty much copy word-for-word the 'eat', 'drink', 'get-around' sections from Lake District. -- (WT-en) Harry Wood 06:43, 18 December 2006 (EST)

The overlap between the two articles is a far greater breach of policy than it would be to lump Cumbrian towns outside of the park into a Lake District article. We could make it clear in either the regions, other destinations, or understand section that the article is covering slightly more than just the park itself, to include the rest of Cumbria. Also, calling it "Lake District" is a bit more ambiguous than "Lake District National Park," which should allow us a little more leeway to make this fudge.

The other option would be to redirect Lake District to Cumbria, and mention here that the Lake District comprises the great majority of the region. I like this solution less, though, as the Lake District is a far more famous name in travel circles, and is obviously the main reason to visit this area of England.

Having the two duplicate articles, though, is just untenable, and we need to choose one or the other to bring this back in line with policy, and also just to better serve the traveller—having two articles basically covering the exact same geographical area is not helpful to the traveller. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 23:07, 17 July 2009 (EDT)

I would prefer that the separate Cumbria article is retained. The Lake District (880 sq.miles) is only part of Cumbria (2612 sq.miles). Out of the 18 towns in the Cumbria article, only 5 are in the Lake District National Park. Two of them are in the Yorkshire Dales National Park. If the Cumbria and Lake District National Park articles are merged there will 22 towns in total, so the region would then need to be split.

The administrative boundaries cut through the National Park, so my preferred option for the Wikivoyage regions would be:

• West Cumbria The coastal strip, outside the National Park, from Barrow-in-Furness to Cockermouth. (6 towns in total)

• Lake District National Park Unchanged with 11 towns.

• East Cumbria The Eden Valley, Lune Valley, and the Cumbrian parts of Yorkshire Dales National Park and Pennines. (6 towns in total)

(WT-en) Chris1515 10:35, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

Since writing the above comments, I have been looking at the articles for other counties and National Parks. It seems that a county is the smallest region in Wikivoyage for continuous coverage (no gaps). There are several English counties with more than 9 cities/towns, but none of thee have been split in to smaller regions. It may be that the above plan to split Cumbria is not appropriate.

I have also noticed that in recent weeks the Lake District National Park article has been edited by Andyfarrell, moving a number of individual sleep/eat entries to the appropriate town articles.

My alternative suggestion would be to keep the Cumbria article and make the following changes to it.

• Move individual sleep/eat entries to the appropriate town articles.
• Add One-liner listings to the cities/towns. This will help put the towns in context within the different parts of the county.
• Move the Talk entry in Lake District National Park to Cumbria.
• Make some style improvements that have already been tagged.

The Lake District National Park and Eden Valley would remain as articles covering the main scenic features, and things to see and do in these areas, similar to other National Park articles.(WT-en) Chris1515 09:36, 7 November 2009 (EST)

I have had a good look at this and think that Chris1515 is very much on the right track with his latest post. Cumbria is a huge and important English county and must have its own article. The fact that part of Cumbria is widely known as the Lake District is really irrelevant. Chris's latest plan for the county will work I think. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:22, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Yes, please disregard my above comment—your proposal is compelling ;) --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 15:20, 7 November 2009 (EST)

I see you are getting on with this Chris. Good luck and drop a note here if anything needs further discussion. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:37, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Looks good, and makes sense. Are any mapmakers able to take a look at the Cumbria map and correct the misspelling of Windermere? (WT-en) Andyfarrell 12:55, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Done. There doesn't seem to really be an SVG version of the map available, so it was a bit of a hack job. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 15:10, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Cumbrian Occupied Yorkshire!

"Cumbria" county council stole a part of Yorkshire too! Sedbergh UDC in the YORKSHIRE DALES NATIONAL PARK! Can you add this to your "Understand" section please?

Banners

I've made a few banners for this page, but I'm not sure which one is best. Alongside the current one, there are:

Grasmere

Buttermere

Nick ^talk 21:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I might be playing sentimental favorites, but I prefer Buttermere :) I daresay it's a better image too. --Peter ^Talk 23:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I think I disagree. The foreground of the Buttermere image is blurry, so I prefer Grasmere. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a tricky one! That's why I put the current one up, although I'm not sure it's of particularly high quality... This banner business is hard! --Nick ^talk 00:06, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Ikan. The front is a bit blurry of Buttermere, and Grasmere is a fantastic image throughout. Globe-trotter (talk) 00:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I've changed it to the Grasmere one for the moment, although I'd still welcome your comments! For reference purposes, here's the previous banner. --Nick ^talk 00:31, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Original

Bus tour

Sure, places associated with Beatrix Potter could be interesting, but do this site's tour listing guidelines allow for a bus tour instead of a self-tour of them by car or some other means to be listed? Due to this paragraph, I think not:

In practice this policy disallows listing most audio tours and guided tours since the substance of such tours can generally be fulfilled by an independent traveller, and the information provided on such tours should ideally be included in the appropriate Wikivoyage article.

It's been very standard for bus tours to be deleted. Any reason not to delete this one? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, so now it's a "mini coach" tour, but that changes exactly nothing about the listing vis-a-vis policy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and deleted the listing, as I think the policy argument for deletion is very strong and it would be hard to imagine a good argument for the impossibility of a self-tour using a rented (hired, for Brits) or traveller-owned vehicle. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)