Active discussions
  • If I print the "printable version" I get an unreadable map of Laussane. I know, the map is great in fullres version.

But guys, I just want to print and to take my plane, not search all the fullres maps.


Hey! You wiped out my stub stuff! I find that stuff really useful when I go through and do the research to put the addresses and phone numbers in. -- (WT-en) Mark 10:36, 5 Jan 2004 (EST)

Sorry about that-- I know they're helpful to you, but they can be really confusing for people reading the content. We're kinda trying to think of the readers now as well as the "content providers." If you want, I'll put them back in, but it does make the page a little harder to parse for real (as opposed to template) information... (WT-en) Majnoona

It's a good point. After thinking about it I believe I've come around to agreeing with you on this. From now on I'm going to try to gather all of the information for stuff right away when I put it in. Thanks! -- (WT-en) Mark 05:12, 15 Jan 2004 (EST)
I'm always so happy when people agree with me ;-). Anyway, the way I do it is to keep copies of the templates in a textfile and just cut & paste the part I'm working on-- I don't think it's a biggie if there is _some_ template stuff in it _sometimes_. Thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona

One map inset or two?Edit

Hi all! I'm trying to decide if it makes sense to the others to have two insets for the wide-area map in Lausanne or just the one. I'd like to hear opinions from folks who've never been there and only know the town from the article, as well as from people who've visited. Here are what I see as the pros and cons to making a single Center/Ouchy inset as opposed to two separate ones:

Points which favour of a single Center/Ouchy inset:

  • More cohesion. A single inset would make it clearer to users that Ouchy isn't really all that far away.
  • Easier maintenance. A single inset would make it easier to maintain the listings, and their icons.
  • A single download. A user needs to print only once to get a map with all but a few of the listings, or twice if they choose to print the wide area map.

Points which favour the existing two insets:

  • Smaller individual image size. The individual images download faster than the bigger one would.
  • Possibly reduced legibility. Some street names might become more difficult to read especially if I try to optimise the larger inset.

Anyhow, I'd love to hear some opinions. Of course I'll try to make up my own mind anyhow... I think I'm leaning toward a single inset. -- (WT-en) Mark

Provided no details are lost, one map should work nicely - it is a bit unusual to have an article with three maps on it, and not being familiar with Lausanne it took me a minute to figure out what each of them was. If the major concern is space/tidiness, the overview map might be a better candidate for deletion as it is seems less useful than the other two, and it was very clear by looking at the train station that the Central & Ouchy maps were extensions of one another. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 15:03, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)
Hi Ryan, Thanks for the feedback! I think you might be right about the overview map, since most of it is residential, and of course it will still be there in the SVG version anyhow. I've resisted getting rid of it, but that might just be an emotional reaction on my part having spent so much time making the shapefile. I guess the only real non-emotional reason to keep it is that there are a couple of attractions which are only visible on the overview, like the Musée d'Art Brut, the Hermitage, and the Tour de Sauvebelin.. but I could just extend the old town map a little to get at least the Art Brut in, because that's the real stand-out. -- (WT-en) Mark 16:40, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)
Mark, Are you interested in sharing the shapefiles? They are great if you happen to be wandering around with a pda with gps and mapping software! Thanks, Tim (WT-en) Fat wombat 00:15, 7 August 2006 (EDT)

Local style convention questionEdit

I assume for stuff like "Mudac, place de la Cathédral 6," we should be capitalizing stuff in the local style. But I see inconsistent caps on place, rte, ave and maybe a few others -- I'm not familiar with usage conventions in these languages, so I need a clue. Also, are rte and ave abbreviations? Do they need a period after them? -- (WT-en) Colin 16:33, 3 March 2006 (EST)

Capitalization is strictly optional for that sort of thing in French. For the most part they prefer to capitalize less stuff rather than more, because in German one capitalizes every single noun, and they like to be able to recognize the difference in print apparently from a distance. -- (WT-en) Mark 08:57, 4 March 2006 (EST)

Net LoungeEdit

This internet place was removed but no reason was given-- Mark or someone, is this place gone? (WT-en) Majnoona 14:04, 26 March 2006 (EST)

It's still there. I'm in a rush at the moment or I'd add it back myself. -- (WT-en) Mark 02:52, 28 March 2006 (EST)

Brasserie ArtisanaleEdit

Hi Mark, I appreciate that you mentioned about the sign -- but, the service is (or was) indeed really slow, especially during the weekend. Last time was our second time to wait at least 20 minutes from asking to actually getting the bill! Another friend also had problem that the waiter came with just the number and said he already threw the bill to the garbage. I did not mean any harm by saying that their service is far from excellent -- I just think it's important that people know that they can't rush here. So they should avoid going there if they have limited time (such as having to catch a train or a movie afterwards). But their pizzas are indeed superb, and might worth all the waiting...! (WT-en) sixzilly 13:35, 16 June 2006 (EDT)

Lausanne Marathon?Edit

anyone gonna write sth about this event? (WT-en) Boggie 10:22, 21 September 2006 (EDT)

I hadn't planned to do so. Feel free. -- (WT-en) Mark 11:14, 21 September 2006 (EDT)

XIIIème SiècleEdit

hi all, as far as i can recall, the price for a glass beer is 6 CHF, rather than 7 stated in the article. any additional clue? -- (WT-en) Boggie 08:44, 10 February 2007 (EST)

Feel free to fix it, or else I will. -- (WT-en) Mark 16:49, 10 February 2007 (EST)


Can someone (Mark perhaps?) who is familiar with Lausanne do an update to the maps so that all info in the article is shown on them? Also, there seems to be a lot of "buy" icons around the map that aren't in the map key... Thanks! – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 19:34, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

Olympic MuseumEdit

Carl Lewis, while a great Olympian, wasn't known for his golden spikes. Michael Johnson was. Whose shoes are in the museum? It's on the Wikivoyage front page right now, and it would be great if it were right.-- 22:26, 15 January 2008 (EST)

Carl Lewis it is: 13:10, 29 January 2008 (EST)


In the introduction it says "Lausanne is a French speaking city, but Swiss-German and Italian are also spoken." It's certainly French speaking here, but very little Italian or [Swiss-]German appears to be spoken. My girlfriend is German, and finds very few German speakers. She always tries English first. Suggest changing to simply "Lausanne is a French speaking city."?

Getting InEdit

Hey all this is a great article - could have used it last time I was there. But can somebody add a "By Car" section for getting in? It's not the most common way to get there, but it is possible, and the more info the better


early november weather - what can I expect? -- 12:26, 4 October 2009 (EDT)woody embry 10/4/2009

Increasing the maps' visibilityEdit

I'm surprised to see a star article with maps that are too small to read unless I click on them three times (and even then, they could really be a lot better, as the street names are quite small). These guides are supposed to be usable as printouts. I'm tempted to nominate this article for de-starring unless this problem is addressed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]

Actually, I can find no record of a star discussion of Lausanne at all - see Wikivoyage:Star nominations/Archives. So I'm going to downgrade the article to Guide. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Seems it became a star in November 2005, before the process was established. Not sure if the star status should be maintained. Jjtkk (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I'm the one to blame for the thumbnail sized maps :). The maps were almost the only illustrations in the map so I myself also wondered how the heck such an article could be a star. Also, the article was and still is so (relatively) short that I had to shrink the maps (the maps in San Francisco's star articles also have to be clicked on before you can read them) in order to make space for pictures, otherwise I'd have to put the pictures of the sights somewhere down in the Eat section. Of course, most of our articles have less content than Lausanne, and I found it quite helpful on a day trip last week. ϒpsilon (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
You can't downgrade articles unilaterally. A de-star nomination has to be filed to give others the chance to fix issues with it. Besides, the maps looked fine before. And Ypsilon, this is a star article, so you have to be cautious with making rigorous changes to the formatting. Globe-trotter (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I've now filed a de-star nomination for Lausanne because of the inadequate maps.
ϒpsilon: this is no reflection whatever on your edits, which improved our article. It's just that my understanding is that Star articles should showcase the very best of our work and act as exemplars for editors working on other articles.
Discussion point: would a dynamic map(s) be an adequate "quick fix"? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Oh dear! I see that the current criteria for Star status for a city, include "Has a tourist-style map, in Wikivoyage style with modifiable vector source, showing how to get around the destination, with major attractions, restaurants, etc. that match the listings in the guide" - so no quick fix there then. Or do the mapping criteria need to change to allow the more easily maintainable dynamic maps? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I've read through Lausanne and invite everyone who thinks it is a sure "star" to do the same. I don't really care to comment about the maps but the article has some MoS issues. For example the currency is written in many different ways, there are listings lacking descriptions and so on. Moreover, I hope that all of the information - especially places like hotels, bars and restaurants - contained in the article and "burnt" into the hand drawn maps is completely up to date, as is required of a star article. Maybe in places like Pyongyang hotels, bars and restaurants don't close, move or change their opening hours, contact information, prices etc. that frequently but everywhere else they have a tendency of doing just that. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Valid points, ϒpsilon.
With many cities it is a Sisyphean task to keep a static map either clear and crisp or comprehensive and up-to-date with all the various listings.
As far as currency formats go, you might like to comment at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Growing_like_topsy. --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[]


The Eat section is OK, but there are some places I should list that are still missing. Drink does still need work. -- Mark (talk) 08:14, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[]

English varietyEdit

Right now, I see this article being changed from British to US English. Is one form of English favo(u)red over the other in Switzerland? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]

Switzerland in general uses BE, the international missions in Geneva and its employees spread AE quite extensively due to the shear amount of expats. jan (talk) 12:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Usually making edits just to change the variety of English is to be deprecated. However, in the case of bringing/restoring an article to Star status, G-T is fully justified in trying to get the article to use a consistent variety since that is mandated by Star status. The perennial and thorny question is whether US English should be used? The federal authorities of the Swiss Confederation [1], the army and other national institutions[2] do not use US English, but rather Commonwealth English of a very high standard - as does the public education system. Although CH is neither a member of the EU or the EEA, it does participate at a gouvernement and bilateral level in their workings where the official variety is Commonwealth English and, consequently, many of its official translators use a non-US variety of English. However, I would suggest that what is more important here is the cantonal choice of variety of English and what is used in the wider francophone area of Switzerland. My vote, if I'm allowed one, would, predictably, be for non-US English.
What I do think is a bit of a stretch, because of the locally popular time format of 18h00-02h00, is to change (the absolutely correct formatting according to our MoS of) "hours=18:00-02:00 | price=CHF4" to "hours=6PM - 2AM | price=4 CHF" (as happened at line 334 of this edit). I would venture to suggest that we should not use the ugly US time format in any Swiss guide.
Current policy is:
"Use one of these formats: 09:30–17:00 or 9:30AM–5PM. Do not use both 24- and 12-hour formats within one article. Choose between formats by following predominant local usage. Ask yourself which format visitors will see in timetables, on shop doors and in newspapers."
The ugly US format is rare to vanishing (outside of US tourist oriented businesses) in Lausannne. [3]
I also deprecate changing the currency format from a consistent use of the "CHF20" construction to "20 CHF" (without a non-breaking space to avoid the amount and the currency designation being separated on different lines) because of the reasoning of users PeterFitzgerald and LtPowers expressed here: Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Growing_like_topsy. Even if their opinions are ignored, the current policy written at $ is "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved).
May I just gently correct jan? Officially, many of the better known international organisations in Geneva use Oxford English spelling (a bit "American" in its use of zed/zee and which even has its own language code of en-GB-oed): Amnesty International, the International Baccalaureate Organization, the International Committee of the Red Cross, World Health Organization (WHO), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the International Labour Organization (ILO), UNESCO, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the World Trade Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Interpol.
Normally, because of the enormous amount of hard work put in by G-T in attempting to use consistent constructions I would not suggest restoring more locally familiar and natural time formats, nor in bringing the currency format back into policy compliance. However, I understand that he is pretty handy in using the AWB tool, so the effort might not be too onerous? --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I do agree that the 24 hours format could be used, I just applied the AM/PM format because that was already applied throughout the article. I just made them consistent throughout. If anyone feels like converting all of them to the 24 hours format, that's welcomed. Same story for the currency. I looked at what was most commonly used and applied it consistently. If someone feels like placing CHF in front everywhere (consistently) it's fine I suppose. I don't think there are any real guidelines for Swiss currency usage. The "growing like topsy" is an interesting discussion, but not a policy that's in place.
About the variety, American English should be used per Wikivoyage:Spelling, as all countries without a history of British English are written in American English. But also in this case, American English was already prevalent, but I saw some British terms, so I applied some consistency to it. About AWB: it's a handy tool, but I don't think it's easy to convert time formats with it. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Gadzooks! What a pity that AWB can not help with the time formatting.
As far as the currency goes, do you not think that wv:aou and the current policy written at $ that "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved) authorise at least the currency formatting changes I so laboriously made by hand in this edit? The Swiss franc symbol of CHF is not one of "...the currencies noted...". --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
The examples on that page, DKK, NOK, SEK, clearly prefer a post-suffixed currency format if three letter codes are used. But I'm not sure if these ISO codes should be used at all. Wikipedia states "The ISO code of the currency used by banks and financial institutions is CHF, although "Fr." is used by most businesses and advertisers". Globe-trotter (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]

CHF before the price with no spaceEdit

My proposal at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Growing like topsy is made partly to avoid having these kind of discussions about more than 100 different currencies, Globe-trotter.
However, the discussion here should focus more narrowly. Fortunately(?) at the time this discussion started here, there were no examples of the common "Fr." format (or any other abbreviations or symbolisations) used in the article - our whole article featured various upper and lower case and positional varieties of "CHF". So, can we limit the discussion to whether the three capitalised letters CHF go before or after the amount? Before the amount is more common in the English speaking world and has the advantages of being one character shorter in the print version (and 6 in code) and not needing the (messy and difficult for newbies to understand and use) non breaking space HTML entity of " ". I'd also submit it's much more in line with the spirit (and, I would submit, the essence) of "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount (except for the currencies noted below)." (emphasis preserved). --W. Franke-mailtalk 17:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
It states "Prices should be listed with the currency symbol that travellers will encounter, specifically the local formatting, but with the currency symbol preceding the amount". So we should be prefixing Fr. instead of using the ISO code. The examples specifically show that ISO codes shouldn't be used. Globe-trotter (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Why? The Fr. construction is by no means universally encountered in Lausanne. This is not a scientific survey, but none of the first ten websites mentioned in the article use the "Fr." construction: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14] --W. Franke-mailtalk 22:06, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
None of the formats is universally applied, that's the problem in the first place. Three letter currency codes have always been avoided because they look very formal and are mostly used by banks and financial institutions. However, it's better to continue this discussion at Wikivoyage:Currency, it's not really related to the article for Lausanne. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I'd welcome your comments at Wikivoyage:Currency, Globe-trotter. However, I would hope that we would want to get a lot more articles to Star status and, unless we change our stance on consistent internal formatting of articles, we do need to choose a consistent format for prices both for this article and for many others. Hence my proposal - as I've said already, to provide some central and consistent and easy to edit and read guidance in our MoS rather than individually on thousands of article discussion pages. I don't think it's appropriate to see Fr. 34 in our Lausanne article, 34 Franken in our Zurich article, 34 CHF in our Grisons article, 34 franchi in our Campione d'Italia, Chf 34 in our Berne article, I'd like the Wikivoyage MoS to offer some coherent advice here to avoid these kind of time-wasting discussions which would be better devoted to improving out travel guide.
I also find it interesting that I could find no occurrence of the Fr. construction in our Berne, Geneva, Zurich and Switzerland articles.
That sermon delivered, we do need to make an actual decision here so that this article can retain its Star status. My proposition is that we consistently use the CHF34 format. Earlier in this discussion I had hopes that you might have accepted that. Do you have a different concrete proposal now, Globe-trotter - or can I go back to editing appropriately? --W. Franke-mailtalk 22:40, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[]
I've been doing some research and checked some other travel guides. The Rough Guide to Switzerland uses the format "Fr.40" and the Lonely Planet uses the format "Sfr40". Currency codes are clearly against the current MoS and this discussion about which format to use has to fall within the guidelines set there. Globe-trotter (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[]
Other guides use the CHF40 notation. However, you are right in saying elsewhere that our policies should determine the formatting of Star articles and not the other way round, so I would encourage everyone here to write their opinions at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Growing_like_topsy since, unless and until slight changes to our $ policy are made, it's almost impossible to resolve this issue and restore/preserve this article's Star status! --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[]

I've resolved this issue by trying to use the "CHF before the price with no space" construction throughout now, since there were no additional comments or objections at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Growing_like_topsy in the last 14 days.

To my mind, the only major thing now standing in the way of continued Star status is the (unnatural for Switzerland) US time format. --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[]

Star article demotionEdit

This article was nominated for a star demotion back on 5th August 2013:

This has been more recently discussed on Wikivoyage:Star_nominations

Since 7 months have transpired, I shall remove the Star status.

Fundamentally the issue seems to be around the current absence of a quality map. If this can be fixed then I would urge someone to renominate this article. Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[]

I added a {{starpotential}} template to this discussion, so that people know that this has good potential for Star status Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[]
I've added a dynamic map and tried to ensure a consistent style for prices, times and flavor of English. What else needs doing? BushelCandle (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[]
Return to "Lausanne" page.