Talk:Neu-Ulm

Lead paragraph

here are two different versions of a lead paragraph for this article.

Wikivoyage:Article skeleton templates/Sections says about the lead paragraph:

"For destination articles, this is where you should put identifying information about the destination, so that the traveller has some idea what you're talking about.... You can pull off a few sentences of interesting tidbits, but try to leave detailed information on history, culture, etc., for the Understand section."

I think that the version that @Hobbitschuster: prefers dwells too much on the history of the administrative status of the town, which would be of little interest to most non-German visitors. Also, this information is repeated in the Understand section, which I think is a more appropriate place for this detail. Ground Zero (talk) 20:37, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Ground Zero. It may be that "having been a 'Reichsstadt' is a big effing deal in Central Europe and every town that can lay claim to it are sure to point it out", but that doesn't mean non-Central Europeans - the majority of our readership - also care. I would say the information is important enough to include in the Understand section, which it uncontroversially is, and that maybe Reichsstadts (or would a better title be Reichsstädte?) would make a good travel topic article if it's as big a deal regionally as claimed. But it's not good intro lede material for this article. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:20, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I basically agree. It could even be fine to mention the former Reichsstadt status in the lead, but in a lively way that makes the travel relevance clear. Are there interesting museums or architecture left from the Reichsstadt days, for instance? The description "until the early 19th century formed part of the self-governing Reichsstadt Ulm before Neu-Ulm was incorporated into Bavaria while Ulm was incorporated into Württemberg, a predecessor state of modern Baden Württemberg" is too much dry administrative history for a paragraph that's supposed to draw the reader in. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:37, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I believe that, auf Englisch, the term is "w:Free imperial city of the w:Holy Roman Empire", which usually translates into having some surprisingly old buildings around town. It would not be unreasonable for the year 1155 to be mentioned in the article. Or even the year 854. w:Free Imperial City of Ulm might be worth a quick glance. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I have revised the lead paragraph accordingly, and added more explanation of the Reichsstadt to the Understand section. Because of the events of the 1940s, there may not be a lot of built heritage remaining from that era, but maybe others can find information on that. Ground Zero (talk) 12:53, 14 August 2020 (UTC)