Open main menu

Hello Superdog! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Project:Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub.

Thanks for your edits to Singapore! I don't think there's any restaurant in Singapore where you can get a bill of S$1000 for two without heavily hitting the wine list though... (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:45, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Buffets, golf and notesEdit

Just three notes:

  1. Hotel buffets are already mentioned under "high tea", and the Shang isn't even particularly expensive β€” the Sunday champagne buffet at eg. Mezza9 is well over $100.
  2. Wikivoyage is a travel guide, so if there are golf courses that are not open to the public, then there's not much point in listing them
  3. And please don't say "Note that X" β€” just say X! (WT-en) Jpatokal 14:54, 11 February 2008 (EST)


Switzerland is a dream place to visit, with enchanting buildings and such natural places of intrest. if you do get the chance to visit (as you said on your "wish list") then be sure to visit a city called Lugano - Its amazing!! The swiss albs are also fantastic, and breathtaking all year round! I've been Lucky enough to visit Switzerland twice, so if you want any tips feel free to ask. (WT-en) Claire Renton, 08:02, 16 February 2008 (GMT)

Is it true that the Swiss portray racialist behaviour? I'm planning to take a trip there and websites have being making those statements, so...just wanted yo know where I'm going is safe in my terms.😁😁 BulbAtop (talk) 10:11, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


Just a friendly heads-up: Wikivoyage does not use <ref>. Texugo (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Universities in Seoul (and elsewhere)Edit

Hi, I have taken out your section on Seoul universities and moved to the talk page LINK

Please note that although contributions are appreciated, they should add something relevant to visitors. If we just add any information we want then the page will cease to be useful as a travel guide.

As per my suggestion, if you want to identify some Korean language courses in those universities, then we could look at adding it back.--Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Any comment here? Talk:Shanghai#Universities Pashley (talk) 04:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
The universities as described in Shanghai are now part of the article fabric (and of the sub articles). I am more comfortable with that. I maintain that Seoul still requires some work to be useful. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:58, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I do think that at least the most famous universities should be listed. There is no need to go through a comprehensive listing of all the universities in Seoul, as that will make things too cluttered. However, there will be travellers who wish to stay in Seoul for an extended period for various reasons such as to experience modern Korean culture, and going there as an international student is one of the ways. So I think it is definitely useful to list the famous universities, so that potential international students have a rough idea on what universities they should consider. The dog2 (talk) 02:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
As suggested in the Seoul discussion, listing universities at this high level may be more appropriate for the country level Article in South Korea . I believe listing famous universities is useful as you say to understand the background of the country, and leave the Seoul page as a list of travel destinations for travelers. (i.e. I would research South Korea online, however would want to print off Seoul as a separate guide to carry with me. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Studying abroadEdit

I notice that you have started that article. Bravo! There have been red links to it for several years.

I have a file that I created for my students, Chinese preparing for study abroad, a few years back. I think it might be of some use in working on the article, and I do not want to do that work myself, so I'd like to give you the file. I was going to put it on a talk page, but the spam filter blocks it because it has dozens of links. Then I thought I might email it to you instead, but you do not seem to have enabled the "email this user" feature. I have, so you can reply by email if you like and I'll send it along. Or do you have another suggestion? Pashley (talk) 06:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I have just enabled the feature. Go ahead and send it to me by e-mail. I'll see what I can do. The dog2 (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Broken LinkEdit

I noticed you added an external hyperlink for Work in Seoul LINK which was broken. I have removed.

Can you please verify that hyperlinks are valid before adding them to articles? Also this action would suggest you have just copied and pasted from another source, and this is against WikiVoyage policy. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I am quite sure the link was valid at the time I added it, but perhaps they re-organised their web-site after that. I assure you that I wrote the paragaph on my own and did not copy and paste from another source. Any similarities are purely coincidental. The dog2 (talk) 05:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
OK, apologies. The link was broken quite soon after it was added, so I had assumed that it was already broken. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

A friendly reminderEdit

Thanks for your recent edits to Canada and Australia, but keep in mind that rather than being an encyclopedia, Wikivoyage is a tourist guide with information on visitor attractions, food and drink, events and festivals, and other things of interest to travellers. Brief summaries about the history of a particular destination are probably fine, but detailed information on the particularities of politics and government is better suited for Wikipedia than Wikivoyage. Please see Wikivoyage:Goals and non-goals and Wikivoyage:The traveller comes first for more information about what kind of information should and should not be added to Wikivoyage. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I would second AndreCarrotflower's request regarding many of your Asian edits. I appreciate that it is not always clear what belongs in a travel guide and what belongs in an encyclopedia, however please take note of this specific text in AndreCarrotflower's link:
Non-Goal Encyclopedia: "Wikivoyage aims to tell people how to travel all over the world, not document everything there is on the planet or how it ended up that way. If you find yourself needing references and footnotes on Wikivoyage, whatever you're writing should probably go to Wikipedia instead" Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

You've been putting in some great work, The dog2
(interesting name - whatever made you pick that? I suppose you're aware of the unfortunate connotations in Australian/British/Irish/Jamaican/New Zealand Englishes?),
but sometimes your edits add just a teensy bit too much detail from the traveller's perspective, don't you think?
I suspect you're a very experienced and knowledgeable Wikipedian but we do strive for a less weighty tone here...
Any way, this editor does need to be guided gently - and perhaps by prior discussion on article discussion pages - if we are not to risk discouraging her great efforts to add content on so many articles, eh? -- 01:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
The guidance provided by AndreCarrotflower can be categorized as gentle, and I would also hope that my own contribution is taken in the same way. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I do not know of the connotations regarding the name but I chose such a name simply because I like dogs. But anyway, back to the point. Well, I was just trying to contribute some background information. Perhaps I may have been abit too detailed in some contributions, but I do think that a brief synopsis of a country's history and political system may of of interest to travellers who want to get to know a particular country better. The dog2 (talk) 03:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Care around financial informationEdit

Hi, I noticed that your have turned your attention to financial information. I would just like to add some caution since some of the UK information you added appeared to not be correct, so please be sure that you do have appropriate first hand local knowledge.

Additionally, you are reorganizing the sections and adding content at the same time. This makes it very hard to see what content you have added. Can you please reorganize and add new content in two separate edits? Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:42, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I think what you added might have been helpful. Unfortunately:
1) the UK country level is getting very bloated and verbose and we need to be careful not to use too encyclopaedic or dry a tone
2) technically speaking the only "legal tender" in Scotland is the pound coin - not even Bank of England notes are "legal tender" north of the border. However, "legal tender" is a somewhat sterile legal concept - we're more interested in the practical information you're trying to add. Don't get discouraged, though - it's very useful sometimes to get a "left field" perspective sometimes!
Andrew makes an interesting point about trying to incorporate organisational changes with copyediting type changes - I noticed you (mistakenly?) reverted my use of the <abbr> tag to explain what US English calls a bank note...
PS is there something shorter and nicer I can call you apart from "The dog2"? (That sounds very rude and unfriendly in Kiwi English...)
--118.93nzp (talk) 03:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Just an opinion.. although I wouldn't call someone a dog without solicitation, I'd have no issue in calling them such if that was what they wanted. I guess it is cultural since (for example) Arabs would be offended, yet many Americans would in fact like to be called 'Dawg'Β :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:36, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


Citation for university rankings?Edit

Hi, I notice you are adding a lot of information about University rankings, such as this for Japan:

Japan's most prestigious university is the University of Tokyo, which together with the University of Hong Kong is considered to be one of the two top ranked universities in Asia.

My question is simply: How do you determine the top ranked universities on both a local and global scale? There is nothing in your edits to indicate this. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:35, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

We don't generally require citations, unless someone actively disputes the veracity of the information being added, when the source(s) are probably best put on the discussion page of the article in question in case somebody else raises a similar objection at a later date.
This editor does live in the region concerned and, because you're right about all the Uni additions, I assume she has done her research.
I hope she has also understood by now that our emphasis is very much on what is useful to travellers rather than those visitors contemplating anything other than a short course... --118.93nzp (talk) 06:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Although citations are in general not required, some of the claims (such as the one above) are actually a bit hard for me to understand. I also live in this region (for the record)
I admit you are right in that these discussions are best left on the discussion page of the article itself, it is just that TheDog2 seldom uses that forum on any article that they are active on. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sure she'll be able to come up with some sources - she's probably away checking as we speak.
The other thing we need to put into the equation is that "prestige" varies between locales. Although in your Japan example it is probably quite clear that we are looking at things from a Japanese perspective, in other less clear contexts what is the "most prestigious" will probably vary considerably (eg between a Singaporean and a Hong Konger) - probably another good reason for hesitating before adding this kind of marginal information to too many country level articles... --118.93nzp (talk) 06:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I use a variety of sources, since every ranking agency uses different criteria, but the ones I do look at include Times Higer Education Rankings, US News and QS World University Rankings. I am fully aware that the rankings do change from year to year, and somewhat differ between the agencies, but throughout the past few years, I have noticed that the University of Tokyo and University of Hong Kong tend to top the list (if we only look at the Asian universities) over the years. In the past 2 years or so, the National University of Singapore is beginning to be added to the mix, so the big 2 of Asia are becoming the big 3, but I'm waiting to see if it can maintain that position for long. Another source which is harder to cite is from my interaction with students from those areas. For instance, if you go to Japan and ask any Japanese, their dream university will be the University of Tokyo. Hong Kong is a bit different, since the top students tend to prefer to be educated overseas in universities such as Oxford and Cambridge, but among local universities, most locals will choose the University of Hong Kong over the others.
I understand that Wikivoyage is aimed at travellers. But based on my understanding of the aims, it plans to cater to all types of travellers, and not just those making short trips for recreational purposes. I understand that it's impractical to list all the universities located in a particular country or city, but I think that it is useful to at least mention the famous ones. After all, by definition, international students are travellers as well, and such information will give potential international students a place to start. But if the Wikivoyage community decides that this guide should only cater to tourists and not other types of travellers, then I'll be happy to oblige and direct my edits accordingly.
And just so you know, I am a he, not a she. The dog2 (talk) 06:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your very prompt and complete reply! --118.93nzp (talk) 06:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks also for the clarification. In terms of travelers, we actually already had that discussion sometime ago in the South Korea article where we built a 'mini-consensus' around listing the most important universities, although not in too much detail. A traveler certainly isn't just someone on a short vacation, however we can go too far in addressing every single permutation of interest to everyone and thereby make the general article unreadable. Have you considered instead giving some momentum to the Wikivoyage:Education_Expedition which does actually seem well aligned with your goals? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:34, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Actually, on second glance, the Education Expedition seems to be more about using WV to teach. How about going to Wikivoyage:Expeditions and proposing a Wikivoyage:University_ExpeditionΒ ? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, While I think that the studying abroad article is a highly valid topic for a WV article (its a major reason driving international travel after all), you're placing much too much emphasis on the elite universities. International students tend to end up across the university systems of the developed countries, for the simple reason that even middling universities in these countries are dramatically better than most of those at home (and, with the exception of the dodgy private collages in the US, there aren't actually that many bad institutions in the developed countries). Not all that many international students would qualify for elite institutions, and most aren't very interested in the kind of research-oriented environment they offer anyway: the general focus is to gain a vocationally orientated qualification and either return home or apply to work in the country they've been studying in. I'd suggest that a better focus for the article would be on the general features of national university systems and how accessible they are to international students. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I completely agree the focusing on prestigious universities is actually not serving the traveler well. Tokyo University will only be of interest to a very limited number of international students, and therefore its ranking is somewhat irrelevant. In the UK, Cambridge (for example) is of great interest to foreign students, although in reality many more international students head to all UK universities of all ranks, and the University of East London is therefore as relevant as Oxford.
On the other hand, I wouldn't want to see a comprehensive list of UK universities added to the UK article. I think Study in the United Kingdom, Study in the Australia and Study in the United States would be good separate feature articles for each country. Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I guess where I grew up in Singapore, everyone there wants to get into the prestigious ones, so that's why I have a tendency to focus on those. I remember back in my high school days, pretty much all of my classmates dreamt of getting in to Harvard, MIT, Oxford and Cambridge. Of course, only the top student actually got in to one of those, but with the exception of me, pretty much everyone who went overseas ended up in a prestigious place. That being said, I understand your concern, so feel free to make any edits that you see to be fit. This is a wiki after all. I think that knowing which universities are prestigious is useful, but yes, what you said about explaining each country's national university system is also useful, since not all international students get into the prestigious universities. Unfortunately, it is not practical to list every single university in the article, but perhaps what Andrewssi2 suggested can be done. The dog2 (talk) 18:18, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


You've been making interesting edits for many years now and seem to be very diplomatic.

Would the admin tools help you in making this a better travel guide?

Do you fight vandalism sometimes? --118.93nzp (talk) 07:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I am not really interested in becoming an admin. I just love travelling, and I just like to share my knowledge about a place. Being an admin is a lot of responsibility, and I am not prepared for that at the moment. As for vandalism, I do try to revert it if I see it happening, but at this point, I have no intention of making it a full time job. Thanks for your suggestion though. The dog2 (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick reply and the useful edits that you continue to make! --118.93nzp (talk) 21:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Perth weatherEdit

Please note that I have reverted your edits about Perth weather - I realise that you have lived in Perth (it has been so hot recently it is ridiculous) the comments about snow i think are so far off the mark about Perth weather I am about to try to re-write. 3 recorded occurences of snow in the hills in 180 years of european presence sems to be a pointless discussion in a travel article. The classic interpretation of the weather of a mediteranean climate area is that snow never happens close to the coast, it requires altitude - hence what you say about the hills in your version is true of the stirling ranges, but not Perth hills (I have lived in the past for over 30 years in the perth hills btw).

Just incase you think i am trying you on - read

I dont think the average traveller really needs to think about snow in perth. sats (talk) 14:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I actually haven't lived in Perth, though I did live in Australia for 5 years, and I have been to Perth before. I actually lived in Adelaide, which is very similar to Perth climate wise, though a little colder in the winter, and with a little less rain. I do make mistakes sometimes so go ahead and correct whatever mistakes I have made. I was mainly trying to indicate that there is no snow in Perth, though later I came across some articles on the internet that there have been recorded instances of snow in the Perth hills. Over in Adelaide where I live, you do get some snow in the Adelaide hills every 10-20 years or so. But down in the CBD, you never get snow. The dog2 (talk) 04:00, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Pointless, I am not sure if you really understand the scope of voyage - really if you read anything about mediterranean climate - snow is not even in the framework or scope of such a weather pattern. Please do not add again, and try to get a better handle on what voyage is about. sats (talk) 07:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I beg to differ from what you said. A mediterranean climate merely means that it experiences dry summers and wet winters. While it is true that most areas with mediterranean climates do not get snow, this is not universal. Rome and Athens are considered to be mediterranean, but they do get snow from time to time. The dog2 (talk) 05:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
that is missing the point, exceptions to the rule are not necessarily what voyage is about, a good overall explanation for a planning traveller doesnt give voyage the opportunity to confuse them the 1% exception to the rule - the information is superflous statistically and not of relevance. sats (talk) 06:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to add to this, however I'd like to make it clear that from the traveler's perspective (which is what is important) that there is no snowfall in Adelaide as well. For someone who claims to have lived in Adelaide (as I have for over a year) I find it very difficult to understand why you would want to labor this point. Even the Wikipedia entry for Adelaide climate says that snowfall is extremely rare in the hills outside the city. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Mount Lofty is technically considered to be part of the Adelaide metropolitan area, and Mount Lofty does get the occasional snowfall. I know that there is no snowfall in the Adelaide CBD or any of the low-lying suburbs. If you define Adelaide as only the CBD, then it's true that there is no snow in Adelaide. But if you include the entire metropolitan area, of which Mount Lofty is a part of, then the term "usually" is accurate. I do not wish to engage in edit war, and neither do I wish to challenge the authority of two admins, but I hope you can let me know how you define a city in Wikivoyage. Do you want to define a city as just the city centre, or do you want to define the city as that which includes the entire metropolitan area. Let me know what you decide, and I will make changes to my editing style accordingly. The dog2 (talk) 06:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Firstly, Admin status does not give anyone any authority over content greater than that of a regular user.
Anyway, I think it is needlessly pedantic to concern whether or not Mount Lofty is in a designated civic area. We really need to take this from the traveler's perspective, and the truth is that they will not boundaries well and will not encounter snow in Adelaide in Perth.
The current text reads: There is no snowfall in Adelaide, although very rarely there can be a small sprinkling on higher ground such as at the top of Mount Lofty and in some towns in the Adelaide Hills . Does this really not cover Mount Lofty from your perspective? Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

That's why I said it depends on how you wish to define "Adelaide". If you define "Adelaide" as just the CBD, then there is no problem with the statement. Adelaide's CBD never snows, while Mount Lofty occasionally gets a light dusting. If you define "Adelaide" as the entire metropolitan area though, then the wording makes it kind of self contradictory. The way it is phrased suggests that Adelaide is one place, and Mount Lofty is another. As far as I have observed, in Wikivoyage we tend to define a city as the entire metropolitan area. Perhaps I'll just re-word it slightly in a way that makes everyone happy. The dog2 (talk) 03:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Fifth Freedom RightsEdit

Hi, partly because of your content related to 'Fifth Freedom Rights', I noticed there was a lot of content in Low-cost_airlines not directly related to Low Cost Carriers.

As such I have created Air travel on a budget and moved content there. I hope you would like to also contribute there as well! Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Jewish businessesEdit

Hi, in reference to your recent edit on the United States, I thought I might let you know about the related discussion on that topic. Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:28, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

English language varietiesEdit

Hello, The dog2. I see you put deleted content back into this article without giving a reason for that. I'm not saying you are wrong to do so, but I think you should read Talk:English language varieties, especially Talk:English language varieties#Californian road parlance, and maybe give your reason there. User:ThunderingTyphoons! has been trying to eliminate redundancies and words that most every English-speaker will understand even if they don't use them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not aware that I put deleted content into the article. If some of the comments I added were previously deleted, please alert me to the fact and I will not put it back in if the consensus is that the comment is redundant. And yes, I just realised I made a mistake in one of the edits. I'll correct it. The dog2 (talk) 04:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't think there's a clear consensus, but the entree edit was previously deleted as redundant, given the relevant entry in English language varieties#Same words, different meaning. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'll delete it then. The dog2 (talk) 05:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
[edit conflict] Also, I think User:ThunderingTyphoons! might say "So what if Americans recognize 'fish & chips'? The point of this article is to clear up possible confusion, not to point out instances of common understanding." Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, that's exactly what I would say. I'm going to delete it, along with two other instances of the same kind of note (for "main course" and "surname"). If you object raise it on the talk page. Thanks! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and Autumn. Cheers, --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Repeated informationEdit

Hi, sorry to undo your [recent edit] on Australia, but you basically added information that already existed further down in the section.

This happened yesterday as well on your edit to United Kingdom where you added information about the Cornish language when it was already covered by another sentence further down in the same section.

It is fine to rewrite a section to improve it, but if you are inserting facts then it would be great if you could at least read the whole section first to ensure that you are not repeating. Thanks. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

In the case of the UK article, it was my mistake for not reading the section carefully so I apologise for that. But I'm pretty sure that what I added to the Australia article was not already covered, so please let me know if there was something I missed. It does say that the governor-general is the queen's representative, but that's only as far as the national government is concerned. Nowhere does it mention that the queen is represented in each individual state government by a governor. And similarly, there's nowhere it explicitly says that the Prime Minister is the head of government, at least as far as I can see. The dog2 (talk) 02:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

CEO or higherEdit

How are you, Dog? I don't understand this edit (nor, to be fair, the previous version of that text). What's a higher position in a corporation than CEO? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to clarify that it meant ministerial positions in the government or large company CEO. Technically the chairman of the board of directors could be ranked higher than the CEO depending of the individual company structure, but I'm happy to have it just be CEO. In essence, I'm trying to reflect the fact than even having served as CFO is not considered to be a high enough position to qualify for the presidency. The dog2 (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. I think "CEO or Chairman of the Board" would be clearer, because I think people normally think of the CEO as the highest position in a company. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


Is perhaps not as great or significant, amd perhaps a better way is a more humbler line on its place and role in the world..Β ?? JarrahTree (talk) 00:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I have no problems with that. I was just intending to point out that Australia punches well above its weight for a country of its population in terms of international influence, and I'd be happy with anything that gets the point across. The dog2 (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Staging oratoriosEdit

What's your evidence that oratorios were not staged during the 17th and 18th centuries? My understanding is that it's quite unclear how often oratorios were staged, and that operas also were sometimes done in concert performances. Do you have any sources to cite in proving what Baroque composers "intended"?

Interesting data point for you:

Staged Oratorio - Italy 1 Jan 1750

The staged oratorio appeared. This resulted in the primary differences between opera and oratorio being the number of parts and the sacred or secular subject matter.

Staged oratorios were most frequently seen in Naples, Italy


Another data point:

Stage action had been abandoned in the oratorios of Italy by the late 18th century. [My remark: If that's the case, staged oratorios must have taken place in Italy until the early-to-mid 18th century.]


Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:22, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I admit that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source, but I understand that Handel's oratorios were not actually staged [1]. Vivaldi's Juditha Triumphans is very operatic in structure, but it premiered in the Pieta, the church which Vivaldi worked at [2], and was performed by the women at the pieta behind iron grills to conceal their faces, so it could not have been staged. I'll see if I can find actual peer reviewed journal articles to support the internet readings I've done, and I'll apologise if I made a mistake of using unreliable sources for my information. The dog2 (talk) 08:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll take your point that those particular oratorios were not staged. I just think we should be careful about making absolute statements about the genre. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:41, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Another data point, cited in
When Taruskin does refer to Italian oratorio, he reiterates the well-trodden (and on more than one count untenable) clichΓ© that β€œthe traditional Italian oratorio was simply an opera seria on a biblical subject, by the early eighteenth century often performed with action, although this was not always allowed”. (p. 3)
The PDF I cite argues that it isn't "simply" that, but doesn't contradict that Italian oratorios were often performed with action on stage in the 18th century.
Of course, you can find a lot of claims that oratorios were not staged, but they are from textbooks or quotes from textbooks. I'd definitely go with Taruskin on this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC)


Hi. I apologize for reverting your edit to English language varieties without comment - I pressed "Enter" by mistake. But what I would have written in my edit summary is that I believe "trousers" is pretty widely understood in the U.S., too, and that it's not important to indicate what is understood, only what isn't understood. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Stay safe/RacismEdit

Hello, Dog. I'd welcome your participation at Talk:United States of America#Stay safe/Racism.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Revert on Driving in the United StatesEdit

To go into more detail on this: Cops I know (and one I know who wrote a book about this general subject) say that "sorry" sounds like someone trying to get out of the ticket. Basically, save it for the judge, for whom it will really matter. OTOH, thanking the officer for the ticket recognizes that he is, after all, doing a job and is not the one who made the rules you didn't really intend to break. And it may be something the cop mentions to the judge, should the judge ask him for any details about the stop (this happens more than you might think, apparently). And you want every break you can get. Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Curb (noun)Edit

Re: This edit. I can't remember "curb" as a noun ever being used in the sense of "a restraint". Where have you come across this usage? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I guess "restraint" isn't the synonym for it, but I have seen "curb" being used as a noun before. For instance, in the financial news, you often see the term "curbs on public spending". The dog2 (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
OK, sure, and I guess I've seen that, too, but it certainly isn't a very common noun. I think that would be a synonym of "restraint". Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Christmas MarketsEdit

Hi, not sure about this page become a list of locations. I have started a conversation on the talk page there. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

What causes offense in the U.S.Edit

Hi, and thanks as always for contributing diligently from your point of view. Before you make more edits to fine tune that section on offending based on food questions, though, you might want to look at the thread I started at Talk:United States of America#Associating people with their ethnicity's traditional foods. In short, I seriously doubt this is nearly as offensive as you think it is; I think it's highly context-dependent and is by no means the same across different ethnic groups.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:United States of AmericaEdit

I saw your last comment on this thread. I hope that I have not misrepresented you or undertaken character assassination. If I have, please let me know which of my statements have made you feel that way, as that was not my intent. I try to maintain a civil tone at all times on WV, but I don't always succeed, and would like to make amends if I have crossed a line. Ground Zero (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

I guess the tone of the debate can sometimes make it seem that I am being accused of added useless information just for the sake of adding it, and I apologise is I misread your intentions. I do have my opinions on stuff, but I'm also open to changing my opinions if other people can give me a logical reason to do so. I don't think it's entirely unjustified for me to say that there are things about the US that a foreigner would notice but an American wouldn't and this is in no way suggesting that I know more about the US than Americans themselves. I'm just saying that as a result of the "culture shock" I experienced when moving to the US, I have the perspective of being able to notice that some things that are commonsense to Americans, but not so obvious to a foreigner. I hope this also clarifies some things. The dog2 (talk) 18:32, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Teaching EnglishEdit

I took most of the material on tests there & moved it to Studying_abroad#Admission_tests. I don't think it really belonged in the Teaching E article, but Studying abroad did not exist a few years back when it was added. Pashley (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

No problems with me. I agree that these tests are more appropriate in the Studying abroad article. The dog2 (talk) 23:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Australian 'Talk' Vocabulary in Australian EnglishEdit

Vocabulary choices in Australian English do vary from both UK and US English, at times favouring one over the other, but also borrowing from non UK or US dialects, while retaining a lot that's unique Which is it more similar to? It depends purely on the context, but a visiter from either country will need to adjust to be fully understood, even if its simply tuning into the sometimes subtle, but sometimes significant difference in meaning for specific words.

I've also lived in Australia before. Sure, Australian English does follow American English in some instances, and also has its own unique slang, but as far as commonly used words are concern, I'd say it's more similar to British than American English. For instance, a "rubber" in Australia would be understood to mean an eraser as in the UK, while Americans will understand it to mean a condom. Even for say, motor vehicle terms, Australians say "bonnet" instead of "hood", "petrol" instead of "gas" and "boot" instead of "trunk". I'll try to find a comprehensive study if one exists, but just from casual observation, I do find a higher incidence of British than American terms used in the street in Australia. The dog2 (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I've lived-in Australia most of my life, and am very familiar with both UK and US English. "Rubber" has both meanings in Australia, and is generally not used for an eraser. As for automotive issues, Australians drive "sedans and wagons" not "saloons and estate cars" (UK), have "intersections" rather than "junctions" (UK), have a "muffler" on their car and not an "exhaust box"(UK) and their car has a "fire wall" rather than a 'bulkhead" (UK). Words like "pants" and "trousers" follow the North American meaning rather than the UK, and Australians have "cuffs" rather than "turn-ups"(UK). For food, Australians use names such as "zucchini" and "egg plant', not the UK "courgette" and "aubergine", and "pudding" also follows US rather than UK meaning. Words that are common to both UK and US English that are not generally used in Australia include "cobbler" (both meanings), "pepper" rather than "capsicum" and "coolar" and "ice box" compared to the Australian "esky". Similarly "thongs" in UK and US English is different than the Australian meaning.

How about we move this to the talk page of the article and see what everyone says. I see your point there, which is why I put the word "generally", which means "usually but not always". Let's see what everyone says. The statement also mentions that Australian English is also known for its own colour and colloquialisms, so that would account for the fact that Australian English has some unique words that are not known anywhere else. The dog2 (talk) 21:32, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


Re: this edit summary, "popular" doesn't mean "lauded" or "highly rated". It just means popular. And the four airlines with the most passengers per year are all American. Powers (talk) 15:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps my understanding is mistaken, but I always thought "popular" means "well-liked". In the case of the US, the domestic air travel market is huge, and people fly US airlines because they don't have a choice - The US government will never allow the likes of Singapore Airlines or Cathay Pacific to operate US domestic flights, as they need to ensure that US airlines stay in business. The dog2 (talk) 18:05, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
No, except as far as popular things are usually so because they're well-liked. Taken literally, though, it just means a lot of people partake of it. Same root as "populous". Powers (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't believe US carriers can operate domestic China flights either. That requires a very flexible open skies agreement, so it isn't just the US being particularly protectionist. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
That's true. I never said the US was particularly protectionist. I don't know of any country that allows foreign airlines to operate domestic routes within the country. Even Hong Kong-based Cathay Pacific cannot operate domestic flights in mainland China. The dog2 (talk) 03:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, although Cathay Pacific is legally a foreign carrier with respect to flying in mainland China Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


I appreciate that you want to contribute to the article. If you're not able to leave it alone, how about spending some time trimming some stuff from it every time you want to add to it? I think many people would be more positive toward your edits if they didn't means net lengthening of the article. Ground Zero (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I do try when I can. I will try to see how I can cut down on the immigration section, given that it does seem a little excessively long. The dog2 (talk) 20:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I agree that section is too long, but it's important, so trimming it is tricky. Good job. Ground Zero (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Again, if you really feel you have to add something, please take out something less important. Many of us worked hard to cut this article down to a reasonable size, and don't take kindly to you coming back to pile more stuff in. Ground Zero (talk) 20:47, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

And Japan, too. This article is still the longest country article of them all. Piling in more stuff while I'm trying to wrestle the article down is not appreciated. Ground Zero (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Leftist "extremism" in the United StatesEdit

My friend, I just deleted your tendentious claim about extreme leftism in the U.S. in the Post-war United Statesβ€Ž article. You need to please stop conflating your experience with a tiny percentage of extremists with what actually happens in the United States outside of those pockets. Extreme leftism has hardly existed in the U.S. for decades at least. There is no strong Communist Party, and even the resurgence within the Democratic Party of people using the name "socialist" like Bernie Sanders tends to be represented by those who merely advocate tame social democratic policies of the type that are uncontroversial in most of Europe, Canada and beyond. On the other hand, whereas the number of Leninists, let alone Stalinists in the U.S. is vanishingly tiny, there is a resurgence of Nazis, Ku Klux Klanners and other out-and-proud racists. So the extremism is almost all on the right in the U.S., as has been the case for some time now, but this is also something not to post about in articlespace because this is a travel guide, not an editorial or a political discussion board. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I must concur. Any actual American left of even remote consequence died with Eugene V Debs. Everything since has been identity politics or social democracy. Both Woodrow in certain regards but surely no leftist extremism. Hobbitschuster (talk) 06:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't intending for this to be a political commentary, but merely to reflect that political polarisation we can actually see, so I apologise if the phrasing wasn't perfect. But although I agree with you that right-wing extremism is a problem, I disagree with you that left-wing extremism isn't a problem. You have the SPLC labelling people and organisations as hate groups on the most tenuous grounds, and these days there's quite a fair bit of Antifa rioting whenever a conservative speaker (even a moderate one) speaks on a college campus. And the moment you suggest that the reason men perform better than women in some disciplines is anything other than misogyny and may have a biological aspect, you will be labelled a misogynist. From the scientific perspective, our brains are slightly different (the corpus callosum is thicker in women, for example), and our hormonal balance is different, which would almost certainly affect our brains in some way, so it comes as no surprise that men tend to perform better in some disciplines, and women tend to perform better in other disciplines. Of course, these are just trends and don't tell you anything about individuals, and the environment and culture probably plays some part too. But of course, the feminists refuse to accept the possibility that biology likely plays a role too, and despite all the scientific evidence we have that this is probably the case, having the audacity to suggest that could potentially lead to me being fired from my job for what they call misogyny. These are just a few of the examples I can think of, but what I can attest to is that these days, the terms "racist", "misogynist", "homophobic", "bigot", etc. are just being thrown around on even the flimsiest grounds, often to shut down legitimate debate because a black/Latino/female/homosexual/whatever person doesn't feel comfortable having his/her ideas challenged by someone from the "privileged class". If this kind of shutting down of debate using slander, fact denial, or selective belief in science only when it conforms with left-wing ideals isn't left-wing extremism, I don't know what is. The dog2 (talk) 07:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Once again, you're going on about doings in a particularly extreme university as if that gives you any insight into American politics in general. Please at long last stop. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I believe the SPLC and Antifa aren't universities. And what do you have to say about the way the two BLM women hijacked one of Bernie Sanders’ election rallies and did not allow him to speak? The dog2 (talk) 07:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Intolerance is not the same as extremist views. There is nothing whatsoever extremist about "black lives matter", unless you think black lives don't matter. Besides, they did it not to drown him out forever but as a strategy to make a point, and the result was that Sanders met them and worked with them on their issue. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
And the very fact that your edits engender this kind of off-topic debate really ought to prove to you that this stuff is not anything you should be posting about in articlespace. It's for that reason that I am holding back from taking your bait on anti-fascism as an example of left-wing "extremism"... Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
(And yes, I know who antifa are, so please do not lecture me about them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 2 February 2018 (UTC))
Hold it: You think the Southern Poverty Law Center is a left-wing extremist organization? Are you serious? You really ought not to call the most effective civil rights litigators extremists. I now think I understand where you lie on the political spectrum and why you seem to think all left-wingers are extremists. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I recognize that the SPLC has a history of doing a lot of good work in the civil rights movement, but it's absurd some of the people they label as extremists. If you look at say, Maajid Nawaz, how on earth could he be an anti-Muslim extremist when he’s a Muslim himself. Yet, that's what the SPLC calls him. If you actually investigate his background, heβ€˜s fighting for gay rights and women's rights within Muslim communities, which I think is a noble cause. And let's be real here. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran have an appalling record when it comes to these issues. Maybe extremist isn't the right word, but the SPLC ought not to slander people like that.
And I did not call BLM an extremist organisation. But I most certainly disagree with some of the tactics used by some of the hotter heads within the movement, which I won't get into detail here. But to sum it off, I'll just say that violence and destroying other people's shops most certainly doesn't sit well with me. The dog2 (talk) 08:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
And let's be clear here. I don't consider every left winger to be an extremist. David Pakman and Ana Kasparian are examples of left wingers who I respect and don't consider to be extremists. The dog2 (talk) 08:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
You think it's impossible to hate a group you belong to? I'd have to look into Maajid Nawaz specifically to have an opinion about him, but the existence of self-haters is not the least bit questionable. But this is just way too much detail, and I don't think this site is the place for us to discuss things like the difference between tactics and ideology and whether some assholes or opportunists using demonstrations as a pretext for misbehavior reflect on the overall movement. But I really wish you would consider whether some talk show host on the left is really of much relevance to the actual power structure in the U.S. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜Of course there is a possibility that someone can be a self hater, but this guy actually once participated in a debate where he argued in favour of the notion that Islam is a religion of peace. It is perfectly fine to disagree with his opinions and some of his methods, but I think calling him an anti-Muslim extremist is pretty absurd.

Anyway, I'm happy to disagree with you on some of these things, and I will not force such things into the article if there is no consensus. But what I will say is that one opinion that disagree with the American left on, which may perhaps be extremist by my standards but not yours, is the idea that "all white people are racist, and black people cannot possibly be racist", which is something I've come across quite a bit on MTV, Huffington Post, Vox and so on. For me, it's simple; if you dislike someone because of their skin colour, you are a racist regardless of who you are or what race the other person is. The dog2 (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

"All [blank] people are [blank]" statements are almost always false, and this one is no exception. However, for someone with a lot of exposure to leftist thinking, you don't seem to have understood the difference in academic contexts between bigotry and racism. Of course in common parlance, the definition of racism is exactly the one you give, but the definition is much more precise in academic contexts, so if you want to understand that, you can do a little reading. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Embassy and consulateEdit

Agreed that these are not proper nouns per se, but isn't Ecuadorian Embassy a proper noun? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:09, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I thought that in this case, Ecuadorian in an adjective and embassy is a noun, which in this case is not a proper noun. I guess it can go either way since you would capitalise "Embassy" if you use the formal title "Embassy of the Republic of Ecuador". The dog2 (talk) 01:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
I would capitalize it, but I get your point that it's not the official name. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Why don't we take this to the talk page and see what everyone says. I can see both sides of this, and I'd be happy to go with whatever the consensus is. But I'll just point out that if you write something like "Chinese man", notice how you would capitalise "Chinese" but not "man". The dog2 (talk) 02:36, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Definitely, but that's not the name of a man, whereas "Ecuadorian Embassy" is arguably the name of a building. I don't care greatly about this and see your point of view, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

User:ShakespeareFan00/Government, politics and oppositionEdit

Following up on a suggestion made on Talk:History of justice, this was started in User Space, because my knowledge of political history outside the UK is somewhat limited.

As you commented in the talk page mentioned, your contribution much appreciated. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Postwar United States#Rise of the automobileEdit

I rephrased and expanded upon what you wrote, as you invited. Please let me know what you think. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I think it looks great. I felt it was necessary to mention these discriminatory practices and their legacy in a fair and non-prejudiced way, especially since the result is so apparent in Chicago, where I'm currently based. Many thanks for your help on this. The dog2 (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


Hi, dog. I was probably in the wrong in asking you not to edit the USA guide, especially as I agreed with this edit and we may get a consensus behind it. You are a valued editor and always have the best of intentions.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

No worries. I have also been at fault for allowing some of these discussions to go off on a tangent. Unfortunately, in the case of the U.S., sensitivities are very much connected to very politically charged issues, and it's easy to stray from the main point of the discussion in the heat of our passions. The dog2 (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Dennis Prager's opinion on the American Civil WarEdit

For what it's worth, regarding this edit, D. Prager has a youtube channel with the ridiculous title of "University". They have a video on just that question and while Prager himself does not appear in that video, the video is surprisingly clear. Unless you have reason to suspect otherwise or evidence to the contrary, I think we can assume that D.P. (that sounded dirty) shares the views expressed in that video. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

To be fair, there are a few conservatives such as Ben Shapiro and Larry Elder who acknowledge the fact that the Civil War was about the South trying to keep slavery. But yes, that video is one of the reasons why I though we should mention the conservative position, as it appears to be fairly common among conservatives. Naturally, I do not engage in this kind of fact denial and I do not share their view, but I thought it was worth mentioning. The dog2 (talk) 23:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Have you watched the video? Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Not yet. I've only seen the title, but I have watched many of Dave Rubin's interviews with conservatives, and this is quite a common belief that I have heard. I'll watch it later but I’m pretty sure it's similar BS. The dog2 (talk) 00:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
You might be surprised... Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I guess I was wrong about him then. I thought it would just be another video of excuses for the Confederacy. The dog2 (talk) 03:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Cantonese phrasebookEdit

I cleaned it up a bit. Would have added more phrases if the article's pronunciations are written in Jyutping instead of Yale Romanization. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:54, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

@OhanaUnited:Thanks for your work. The pronunciations are in Yale simply because that's what the editor who did most of the work on it chose. That particular editor is no longer active, and I don't think anyone will object if you change it all to Jyutping. But anyway, please just add the phases even if you don't know what the Romanization is. Romanizations can always be added later. The dog2 (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Your reverts on SingaporeEdit

Hi, I got your point but still differ in viewpoint. I still stand on my view but will not contests the reverts. --Cohaf (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

You're always welcome to start a discussion on the talk page. We work by consensus here, so it's not just about you and me. Whenever there's a dispute, we go to the talk page, try to get more people to join the discussion, and hopefully come to a consensus. The dog2 (talk) 03:57, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replied on my talkpage, yes I know wiki work on consensus. Sadly, the content on Chinese version is woefully lacking for Singapore articles, both on wikivoyage as well as Wikipedia, so for these minor details, I will accept your views as you are clearly more experienced here and I simply do not hsve the time to start discussions--Cohaf (talk) 04:11, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Mainstream black music and musicians in the U.S.Edit

Hi. I'd like to discuss this edit with you. I appreciate your reasons for making the edit, and there's some truth to it, but it's historically quite problematic.

I assume you mean for ragtime and not black spirituals as caricatured by minstrel troupes to be the first mainstream black musical style in the U.S. If so, it burst onto the national scene with performances at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893, though it took a few more years for the first rag to be published, so turn of the 20th century.

However, how early was the first mainstream black musician? Not counting the fame of Scott Joplin, mainly as a composer, there was James Reese Europe and the Hellfighters in the teens as a worldwide superstar of big-band ragtime. Louis Armstrong was the foremost of several black New Orleans jazz artists who broke onto the national scene in the 20s. In the swing era, there were among others the Count Basie Orchestra, the Duke Ellington Orchestra, Fletcher Henderson, Lionel Hampton and Ella Fitzgerald. And starting in the 40s, there was the superstar, Nat King Cole. When rock 'n' roll/R&B became ascendant in the 50s, there were Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Fats Domino, among others, and certainly, Chuck Berry was world-famous very quickly.

In no sense was the 60s the first decade when black artists had popularity among white audiences. The change is more subtle than that, and it involves the segregation of the recording industry, with "race records" (after WWII, "rhythm and blues") being defined as "music performed by black musicians for black audiences", and the way that particular type of segregation started to break down in the 50s, with Chuck Berry foremost among those getting top-10 hits in both categories for the same music, weakened again in the 60s when Motown deliberately appealed to all audiences, and weakened further in the 70s and 80s with white artists crossing over to R&B at the same time that Michael Jackson became the biggest-selling pop superstar in history.

The problem for a travel article is that it might be difficult to summarize this briefly enough, while still having a modicum of accuracy.

I think I have a suggestion, though, which is to say that while black music had tremendous mass appeal throughout the postwar period, black artists often had trouble in their efforts to receive as much pay and recognition as white artists, frequently being left impoverished by exploitative recording companies and, especially in the 1950s, by white groups releasing covers based on their recordings and undercutting their profits, and that this inequity eased substantially in succeeding decades, ultimately paving the way for Michael Jackson to establish himself in the 1980s as the top-selling pop star of all time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I know of Scott Joplin and ragtime, and I'm familiar with "The Entertainer", but I wasn't sure how mainstream he was or how popular he was among white audiences given how racist people were back then. But anyway, I'm happy with what you suggested. The role of African-American music in American pop culture is most certainly too significant to ignore, and we also need to address the historic injustices faced by black artistes. Your suggestion covers all that. The dog2 (talk) 23:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure people in the 1890s were much more racist than in the 1950s. Certainly people were more racist in the 1920s than in the 1870s. At least white people in the US. "Separate but equal" only became law in the 1890s and segregation in the federal government was introduced by Woodrow Wilson. At any rate, the history of African Americans between the two great sixties that are usually talked about is interesting for a couple of reasons. And it might be instructive which tactics to use and which to refrain from when fighting for justice.
at any rate, a trend of more recent vintage is Hispanic music crossing over into Anglo circles, most notably despacito. Now that specific song may be a fluke, but the enduring success of artists like Pitbull or Mark Anthony and genres likelike reguetΓ³n is notable if only something that's occurred over the last two decades or so... Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes. Though that has powerful antecedents, too. There was substantial Latin influence on ragtime and jazz; Western swing, which has very strong Tejano influence, was very popular in the swing era; and then there was the mambo craze in the 50s; the bossa nova craze in the 60s (though that's Luso-American, a mixture of Brazilian samba and jazz); the Latin influence on disco. Also important to mention is the mainstream popularity of Tito Puente and Ritchie Valens' hit rock 'n' roll version of "La Bamba" in 1958. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
One comment about racism and the popularity of black music among white audiences: These coexisted for decades and probably well over a century, if you consider the minstrel craze that started, I think, around the 1820s. Consider the fact that Duke Ellington's orchestra was being broadcast nationally on the radio in the 1920s from the Cotton Club, where he could not have been a patron because it was segregated.
I think that the continuing popularity of black music and particularly of forms of the blues (which is really to a large extent what rock 'n' roll was in the 1950s and early 60s) among younger white Americans ultimately helped subvert segregation, sexual repression and the repression of women - both because of who performed it and because of the lyrics they sang - but it took a long time, has obviously remained quite incomplete, and it was neither a linear process nor close to a one-to-one correspondence. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
I also wouldn't mind adding parts about Hispanic influces in American pop culture. I agree that it has a huge influence, though if I'm not wrong, the acceptance of Latino artistes into the mainstream came later than the acceptance of black artistes. I'm just not as well aquainted with Latino music as I am with African-American music. But I certainly of know a large number of Latino artistes like Arianna Grande, Ricky Martin, Christina Aguilera and Selena Gomez. The one group of Americans that has not been accepted into mainstream American pop culture is Asian-Americans, to the point that most Asian-American artistes are only able to launch successful careers by moving to Asia. (eg. Wang Leehom and Utada Hikaru) The dog2 (talk) 01:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Actually, Ariana Grande is Italian-American, not Hispanic. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

β”Œβ”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”€β”˜Sorry, my mistake, but I think I got the point across. The influence of both African-American and Hispanic music on modern American pop culture cannot be overstated. And as a side note, I'm actually a fan of African pop music, and if you listen to some of that, you'll notice how much African music has influenced American pop culture, and even the pop culture of Latin America and the Caribbean. The dog2 (talk) 04:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

The influence has gone both ways, but Soul Makossa was definitely a big influence on disco. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:04, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Have a look. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
That looks good. The dog2 (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Tangentially, I just started a Rock and roll topic article. Ο’psilon (talk) 13:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


I won't revert this, as online sources I've been reading today lump in bossa nova as a Brazilian stream of Latin jazz. Bossa is not at all what I know to be Latin jazz, which is really Afro-Cuban jazz. I think the reason why I don't call Brazilians Latin, though, may have more to do with what "Latin" means in the U.S. than what it means elsewhere. I see that Brazil is included in w:Latin America, but in the U.S., many Brazilians consider themselves Luso-American and not Latinos, as Latinx tends to be synonymous with Hispanic here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think I referred to Brazilians as Latinos in the edit, but Brazil is still considered to be part of Latin America even if Brazilians are not referred to as Latinos. I definitely know of Lisa Ono and bossa nova, although I'm not sure whether she'll be regarded as a Latina even if Brazilians are considered to be Latinos, given that she's ethnically Japanese. I understand this is a complicated issue though. Will a Chinese-Cuban be considered Asian or Latino? And likewise, how would you refer to an American whose parents are white South Africans? It probably wouldn't be technically wrong to call that person African-American even if he/she wouldn't typically be regarded that way. The dog2 (talk) 04:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
I have relatives in Mexico and Argentina. I don't know them personally, but since our ancestors came from Europe around the same time, they're presumably as Latino as I am Anglo. And I have some experience with Cuban-Chinese people. There used to be a bunch of Chino-Latino Cuban-Chinese restaurants in New York. Now, only a few remain. I never directly asked, but I think that the owners, managers and waiters were both Chinese and Latino. Similarly, I knew a Chinese-Jamaican guy named Chan, and he was very Jamaican in identity. I think the biggest issue in identity is what we should call the millions of aboriginal people from countries that otherwise speak Spanish. In what way is a Quechua or a Mayan - especially one who doesn't speak much Spanish - either Latino or Hispanic? But that's not so much an issue in terms of jazz, although I did know one Tupi-Guarani musician from Brazil, Thiago de Mello. I'm sad to see that he died in 2013. He was my phys ed teacher in 8th grade, and he was a very nice man. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Travel topic templatesEdit

From the travel topic you recently created, it seems that you do not know that there is a standard template used for travel topics. Here is the code for it:

{{pagebanner|TT Banner.jpg}}

'''[Insert travel topic name here]''' is a travel topic about [insert short explanation here].

==[Insert heading name here]==

==[Insert heading name here]==


You can have as many headings as you like, and call them whatever you like, but it's best to start out with this template (in source mode) and then start working on the article, in visual mode or source mode, whichever you prefer.

If you have any questions, please ask them, I will be happy to answer.

Thanks for these recent travel topic articles you have started.

--Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:32, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Adjunct professorsEdit

Hi. We've discussed this before, but not only is it fairly common for students to call Adjunct Instructors "professor"; it's not even necessarily incorrect. When I used to teach at CUNY schools, my title was Adjunct Assistant Professor. So please, I think this is the second time you've incorrectly asserted that only full-time professors are called "professor" in the U.S. It's not true. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I can't remember if I made this edit previously, but what I was meaning to do was to account for the fact that TAs and community college faculty are instructors but not addressed as "professor". Sorry if it was unclear what I was trying to do. I wasn't disputing the fact that adjunct professors are also called "professor". The dog2 (talk) 03:36, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Uh, not at all true about community college faculty! There are both tenured and adjunct professors at community colleges! Just say that teaching assistants are not professors and not so-called, or some similar but briefer explanation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
OK, I guess I was misinformed then. I thought community college instructors were called "teachers", and my understanding is that even K-12 public school teachers in the US are tenured although they are not "professors". But point taken about university instructors. The dog2 (talk) 03:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I can tell you as someone who used to teach at community colleges that it's quite incorrect that we were called "teachers". Of course, generically, professors are a kind of teacher, but that's beside the point. I'm curious who misinformed you about this. Also, community colleges can be part of a university, as I mentioned (CUNY has a bunch of community colleges along with 4-year and graduate ones) so the distinction you're trying to make in that regard is illusory. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
It wasn't by a specific person but by Google. When I typed "community college professor" in Google search, the first result that came out was "How to be a community college teacher", so I presumed that I had made a mistake. And I guess it was confusing for me since we don't have an equivalent of community college in Singapore. There are tertiary level institutions other than universities in Singapore, but you generally go to those in lieu of high school (in other words, you get in straight out of middle school), and you most certainly don't called the instructors there "professors". "Professors" only exist in universities (just like in the British system), and only those who have attained the rank, and not all instructors, are addressed as "Professor". The dog2 (talk) 04:22, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Blessed New YearEdit

Have a healthy and happy year ahead. Wishing you health and happiness.--Cohaf (talk) 04:34, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. You have a happy new year too, and all the best for the year ahead. η₯δ½ ζ­ε–œε‘θ΄’οΌŒεΏƒζƒ³δΊ‹ζˆγ€‚The dog2 (talk) 04:57, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Gong xi fa cai, Dog. All the best, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Quebec cuisineEdit

Do you know anything about QC cuisine? I'm only asking because of your edits to French cuisine, and the fact that the Eat section on Quebec is a bit sparse, particularly on explaining the Gallic influence (poutine is possibly the least French food imaginable, yet that article claims French gastronomy has helped to shape the QuΓ©bΓ©cois diet). Have you anything interesting to add?

BTW, thanks for taking out two instances of a suspect claim about knowledge of the French / Italian languages being essential to properly appreciate the food - they were so similar in wording, they must have been written by the same author. Best wishes, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have not been to France, but I have been to Quebec and I guess if you go to a restaurant in Quebec, many of the dishes would be French based but with a Canadian twist. One dish I remember I really liked was a duck confit with maple syrup. I can't think of anything else specific now, but I would say that the emphasis French Canadians place on their cuisine is very much due to their French heritage, as you don't get the same gastronomical adventure in the Anglophone parts of Canada.
And I will admit that I wrote the initial versions of those sentences, but they came off a little wrong, which is why I made further edits so there won't be any misunderstandings. What is true though is that French and Italian colleagues have told me that in general, if you want better food, go to the restaurants where the waiters don't speak English, as those are the ones that cater more to locals. If you go to a restaurant with English-speaking waiters, chances are it is a tourist trap. And while I haven't been to Italy either, I have been to Spain, and one of the best culinary experiences I had was at a restaurant with no English menu or English-speaking waiters, in which I had to fight my way through a Spanish phrasebook to communicate. The dog2 (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
I totally agree with this, too. Your best bet is to look for places that have no English-language menus and speak with the waitstaff in the local language. I think that's just about always best, though less important a lot of the time in countries like The Netherlands where English is so widely and well spoken. As someone who's been to both France and Quebec, I didn't get much of an impression of Quebecois cuisine being similar to French cuisine I know. The duck confit example is a good one, but my general impression of Quebecois cuisine (though I haven't spent a long time in Quebec) is that it's pretty stick-to-your-ribs, with a lot of meat and potatoes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Edits at Horse racingEdit

Dear @The dog2:, I see I deleted your edits accidentally, thus I apologised for that. Actually, your idea to split the ibfobxes is helpful so it easier on the readers. Again, sorry I undid your edits. Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 19:23, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries. The dog2 (talk) 19:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussions about race, politics, bias, etc.Edit

Hi and thanks for contributing.

I have noticed lately (as have others) that you have been starting discussions on controversial issues, and generally editors are not too happy about these discussions and the course that they take. It would be helpful if you made clear that you will no longer start or take place in these kinds of discussions. If you see an issue with Wikivoyage, you can always email me or bring up the issue on some talk page that does not receive so much attention (as the issues of concern are usually minor on balance).

Unfortunately, if these kinds of discussions continue, things may fast head towards a topic ban, which I do not want to see. It would be easier to resolve things here than at the user bans page, which should not be used when possible.

I hope we can come to an agreement on this issue. Thanks.

--Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 13:50, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I was thinking of responding to this in the pub, but I'll do it here instead to avoid further inflaming things.
I don't think you are being fair in saying that I'm bringing up political discussions on Wikivoyage. This discussion I was intending to have was purely about what terminology to use due to concerns about potential ambiguity, and nothing to do with politics. In fact, I stopped responding to the thread on seeing AndreCarrotflower's response, since I found that to be a satisfactory enough answer. I never mentioned anything about people getting offended. And previously, someone else brought up the issue about the use of "Caucasian" to mean "white people", so I don't see how this was being different from that. I've taken the point made that perhaps I was being too nitpicky on semantics and some degree of ambiguity is OK as long as people pretty much know what we're referring to, and I will keep that in mind before I bring up any issues in the pub and talk pages, but I don't think it's fair for you to blame me when other people take the discussion in a political direction that I never intended for it to take. I can personally commit to not bringing up political issues unless they affect travellers, and I fully support WV being non-partisan, but whether or not other editors take discussions in a political direction is beyond my control. The dog2 (talk) 15:04, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
I simply think that it would be better to email me or other users over this, rather than taking the discussion to a high profile place. This is not a one-time thing, but a continued pattern of starting these kinds of discussions. All I need is a clear answer, one way or another. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:41, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
I am just going to say this. I will not bring up any political issues unless they have to do with things like traveller safety and things essential for travellers to know, and I will try to be less nitpicky when it comes to semantics, but I cannot accept culpability for what I see as an unfair accusation you are making against me. As I said, I never intended for that discussion to become political, and it was other people who steered it in the political direction it took. If anything, my final comment in that thread was actually an effort to steer the discussion away from politics and get it back to semantics. I accept the criticism that perhaps I was too caught up in trying to fix potential ambiguities and should probably not have brought that issue up given that the potential for confusion is low, but I don't appreciate you blaming me because other people made that discussion political, which is obviously beyond my control. The dog2 (talk) 17:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not trying to punish you. I hope to see the best possible contributions from you, and I hope that this discussion in no shape or form sows disunity or discord between us or the rest of Wikivoyage. Really, I'm acting on the behalf of those in the community who have raised concerns about all this. However, what you need to recognize is that some discussions, while not inherently political, will easily become political due to their nature β€” the "African descent" discussion somewhat falls under that category, but the "media bias" one does so greatly more. What I hope for is an agreement that we'll stay off the semantics, especially in the case of controversial issues. That is very simple and all I ask of you.
Thanks for your patience on this issue. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:23, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
I still don't think you or the community's accusations against me are fair but I will make a compromise offer in the interest of defusing tensions. I can offer to not bring up semantic discussions unless the potential for confusion is high. The dog2 (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
That's fine with me. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:58, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • If you don't mind my saying, I think your contributions have really improved lately. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:21, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

Hello! Thank you for your copyedit and general fixes on my edits. Have a cup of coffee on me, to thank you for your hard work. --Wikiemirati (talk) 02:44, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

My pleasure. And thank you for expanding the UAE article. The dog2 (talk) 03:14, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Minnan phrasebookEdit

Do you have any comments, especially in the last two sections? Pashley (talk) 23:30, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)


I undid your edits because I don't think they were relevant to this project, and their content is historically controversial. I would have put this in an edit summary, but I had to rollback. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I thought that it would be an interesting point that highlights just how strong the Swiss identity is, since it was able to survive even such stark political divisions. What I wrote was simply based on what I learnt in history class in school, but I am open to being educated on the topic if you know the situation better. The dog2 (talk) 20:07, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm not trying to educate you, I just don't think Nazis should ever be used as a passing interest to illustrate something which is nothing to do with Nazis. And I also don't think a reference to far right politics from 75 years ago is welcome in the middle of a travel guide to Switzerland.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:44, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "The dog2".