Talk:Lake Balaton

Should this article exist ?

Yes, but only if it is made clearer that this is a REGION and not an article about just Lake Balaton.

Wikivoyage:Bodies of water currently states: Bodies of water such as lakes and rivers do not get their own article on Wikivoyage, with the exception of land regions named after a body of water such as Lake Tahoe. and We don't write destination guide articles about bodies of water BushelCandle (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Answer to the first question: There isn't any reason to debate whether this article should exist. Lake Balaton is a major destination in Hungary and has been for a long time.

How would you like to make it clearer that this is about a region? Is anything more needed than to use the phrase "the Lake Balaton region" somewhere? Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes - preferably in both the formal title and banner. BushelCandle (talk) 11:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The precedent is that articles about lake regions always (or at least almost always) are given the name of the lake. I see no reason to give this article a cumbersome name. The directive the traveller comes first is much more important than the bodies of water guidelines, so we don't want to make names user-unfriendly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll try and work out what the poesy is trying to convey. BushelCandle (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

LATER: I give up. I really don't know what to do with "The oldie, nostalgic wonder, what Balaton has, catch every visitors. The Balaton has lot of faces. In every season others, what make the visitors to discover. Not only the water, the summer feelings and fun, but the flora and fauna and the many ages demonstrated cities give you some experiences." BushelCandle (talk) 12:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Please feel free to just substitute something better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:55, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate maps

Which one should be removed in this case? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't know. The PNG is a lot more detailed, but it's not a Wikivoyage-style static map. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

I've removed the static map because I think the dynamic map is better in this case. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

I just stated the reverse above. I guess I wasn't clear enough, but why did you think the dynamic map was better, even though the static map was much more detailed? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, the static map doesn't have the markers or anything like markers. It also doesn't look like a static map, and while it includes roads, cities, and the lake it doesn't include much else. But yes, I didn't realize that your comment was saying that you preferred the static map, more that you were just weighing up the pros and cons. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:26, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

It showed way more cities and was much clearer. If you already have your own viewpoint, either don't ask for anyone else's opinion or at least state it. Asking for others' opinions and then immediately disregarding them feels disrespectful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Hmm... I never intended to disregard anyone's opinions. If you prefer the static map, I'm happy to include it instead. But if you don't state your opinion, how am I supposed to know that you didn't want me to remove the static map? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

So I've changed to the static map only, as you preferred. Notice how I'm absolutely ignoring your opinion to the fullest. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

So my feeling is that we needed a discussion. The point I made was that the static map (the PNG, as the other one was presumably a mapshape) is much clearer, but it's not Wikivoyage-style. I don't know where that comes down, but yeah, I was suggesting that at least for the time being, the best way to serve a traveler would be to use the static map. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Sure, I wasn't extremely serious anyway. Now I go to my talk page to celebrate 10,000 contributions. Interesting how I've become an administrator and reached 10,000 contributions right around the same time. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

:-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:43, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

I didn't just add the dynamic map back. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 02:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

City-busz, I suppose you must have been unaware of this discussion. The static map is clearer and more detailed than the dynamic map. Can you please explain why it should not be restored again? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

• The static map does not cover the whole Lake Balaton region, e.g. Marcali and Zalakaros are missing from the map.
• The static map does not follow the Wikivoyage-style, and it's hard to edit.
• The dynamic map allows to define subregions with different colors, which makes it visible the coverage of each articles.
• The dynamic map gives more details when the user enlarge the map.

For these reasons the dynamic map is cleaner for me. --City-busz (talk) 08:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. That's very convincing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:03, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I'd agree as well. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 13:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Western Balatonfüred district

@City-busz, SelfieCity: This is a region article; detailed listings go in the city articles, district articles, rural area articles or (national) park articles. This article should only provide a brief overview.

There are several detailed See listings clustered in Western Balatonfüred district. As the article for Balatonfüred Town has a lot in it already, I think that the best way to fix this is to move these listings to a new Western Balatonfüred District article. Any thoughts? Ground Zero (talk) 14:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I think it would better to add them to Balatonfüred article. These are just small villages. We don't need to split them into separated article until we don't have much more content about them. City-busz (talk) 16:59, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree we can move these to the Balatonfüred article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 17:07, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. I'll do that then. Ground Zero (talk) 13:07, 27 November 2021 (UTC)