Talk:Tourism in metropolitan Detroit/Archive 1
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
First sentence
As far as I know, an article is called advertising when it is:
Wikipedia is not a soapbox
Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Wikipedia articles are not:
- Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.
- Self-promotion. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects you have a strong personal involvement in. However, do remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other, including the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which is difficult when writing about yourself. Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles is unacceptable. See Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.
- Advertising. Articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Wikipedia does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability.
Stating that Detroit's tourism is a: "Tourism in metropolitan Detroit, Michigan is a driving force for the economy." does not qualify under any category. The fact the city hosts SuperBowls, has three growing Casinos, hosts an annual NA auto show, just hosted Wrestlemania, will host the Final 4 in 2009, has a growing hotel reno project on-going, all make the statement factual, and hardly in need of defence. --Mikerussell 17:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook
- Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook
- Travel guides. An article on Paris should mention landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre, but not the telephone number or street address of your favorite hotel or the price of a café au lait on the Champs-Élysées. Wikipedia is not a place to re-create content more suited to entries in hotel guides, culinary guides, popular eating guides, gazeteers, travelogues, and the like. Notable individual locations may meet inclusion criteria, but Wikipedia does not list every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel, venue, etc. Such details may be welcome at Wikitravel, however. WP:NOT#TRAVEL
This article is very nearly a tourist guidebook. Rather than reporting on tourism, it describes tourist attractions and makes suggestions. I've removed a couple of listing, but the article needs a full review. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 16:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Can someone explain why the material was restored? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- As I stated in the edit summaries- Tourism is not travel. You have failed to make your point in regards to the wikipedia policy you quote too, especially as it states:"Notable individual locations may meet inclusion criteria, but Wikipedia does not list every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel, venue, etc.". Tourism is an important economic activity, it encompasses trade, conventions, sporting events like the Olympics or Superbowls (Detroit may apply for 2020 Olympics) and, to quote the wikipedia article on Tourism itself "the provision of services to support this leisure travel" (First paragraph, second sentence). With the rise of the casino sector of the tourism industry in Detroit, and the pursuit of conventions tourism is a major component of the economic activity of the city and region. Naming, with addresses-which can be used by readers to google map locations- resturants and other services geared towards tourism adds value to the article, giving people a sense of what level of economic activity is supported in the region. If Las Vegas lists a run down of casino hotels, how is this article any different? If anything I have thought more detail about restaurants should be added as it shows the economic spending habits of the region. I would support classifying the restaurants as "Fine dining" vs. "casual dining" etc., b/c it shows the money being spent in the city daily- or not- in a case of other cities. As I said in the edit summary, listing a region's collection of corporate head offices would be similar in providing information and sourced fact about a region's econmomic vitality. If there is material written like a travel publication, it should be reworded or excluded; I supported your deletion of this sort of thing.--Mikerussell 14:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOT is an official policy. It says do not include the addresses of restaurants. I don't see any discussion of tourism past the first paragraph. What I do see is a guide for tourists. There's no other article in Wikipedia like this. Tourism in London is the closest, but it's about a tenth as long as this one. There's nothing like it for such tourist destinations as Las Vegas or Los Angeles. If there's no agreement to clean this up the only other option is to delete it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't like the arguement that the article is unique and thus must have something wrong with. I hate to say it right now, but I haven't read it in awhile and maybe I should reserve comment, but have just not had the time. I will sometime soon. Whatever the case, the more attention it gets the better- so go for it- try a delete nom, I have nothing aginst such debates. So far all you have said is you don't read it as anything more than a travel guide- why is that not such a strong arguement? Too many reasons to list, I guess..--Mikerussell
- Yes, the entire article reads like a travel guide. The only sentences that talk about the tourism industry per se are these two:
- About 15.5 million people visit Metro Detroit annually, spending an estimated $4.4 billion.[1] Michigan's tourism website ranks among the busiest in the nation.
- Otherwise I don't see any discussion of the tourist industry, just descriptions of tourist attractions. The lists of non-notable hotels and restaurants appear to be original research. There are lots of problems with this article. If there's no interest in improving it to bring it into compliance (and if attempts to do so are reverted) then deletion appears to be the best alternative. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the entire article reads like a travel guide. The only sentences that talk about the tourism industry per se are these two:
- I don't like the arguement that the article is unique and thus must have something wrong with. I hate to say it right now, but I haven't read it in awhile and maybe I should reserve comment, but have just not had the time. I will sometime soon. Whatever the case, the more attention it gets the better- so go for it- try a delete nom, I have nothing aginst such debates. So far all you have said is you don't read it as anything more than a travel guide- why is that not such a strong arguement? Too many reasons to list, I guess..--Mikerussell
- WP:NOT is an official policy. It says do not include the addresses of restaurants. I don't see any discussion of tourism past the first paragraph. What I do see is a guide for tourists. There's no other article in Wikipedia like this. Tourism in London is the closest, but it's about a tenth as long as this one. There's nothing like it for such tourist destinations as Las Vegas or Los Angeles. If there's no agreement to clean this up the only other option is to delete it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- As I stated in the edit summaries- Tourism is not travel. You have failed to make your point in regards to the wikipedia policy you quote too, especially as it states:"Notable individual locations may meet inclusion criteria, but Wikipedia does not list every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel, venue, etc.". Tourism is an important economic activity, it encompasses trade, conventions, sporting events like the Olympics or Superbowls (Detroit may apply for 2020 Olympics) and, to quote the wikipedia article on Tourism itself "the provision of services to support this leisure travel" (First paragraph, second sentence). With the rise of the casino sector of the tourism industry in Detroit, and the pursuit of conventions tourism is a major component of the economic activity of the city and region. Naming, with addresses-which can be used by readers to google map locations- resturants and other services geared towards tourism adds value to the article, giving people a sense of what level of economic activity is supported in the region. If Las Vegas lists a run down of casino hotels, how is this article any different? If anything I have thought more detail about restaurants should be added as it shows the economic spending habits of the region. I would support classifying the restaurants as "Fine dining" vs. "casual dining" etc., b/c it shows the money being spent in the city daily- or not- in a case of other cities. As I said in the edit summary, listing a region's collection of corporate head offices would be similar in providing information and sourced fact about a region's econmomic vitality. If there is material written like a travel publication, it should be reworded or excluded; I supported your deletion of this sort of thing.--Mikerussell 14:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- How is existence of a Cruise Ship dock and relevant associations and cruise lines not relevent to the tourism industry? Isn't that what was reverted. You really haven't explained yourself and your reasoning doesn't make sense, so the reverter had a point. The restaurants listed are respresentative of the region's culture. Some of hotels are listed for architectural reasons, some historic locations, and some for economic importance to particular locality. They are by no means a list of every hotel. The region has tens of thousands of hotel rooms. Thomas Paine1776 19:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Michigan's tourism website
"Michigan's tourism website ranks among the busiest in the nation." Tom, I'm not sure this is appropriate for an article on Metro Detroit. The website does not seem particularly focused on Metro Detroit. In fact, I don't see a single mention on Detroit on the front page. If you can provide a source showing that the Detroit part of the website has remarkable traffic, this would warrant inclusion. Otherwise, there's a false implication — that Michigan's tourism site is busy primarily due to people's tourist interests in Metro Detroit.--Loodog 03:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The tourist numbers For Metro Detroit begin the article. There's no misperception, Michigan has a big tourist industry which includes Metro Detroit. Thomas Paine1776 22:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Right, I agree, but to say "Metro Detroit has tons of tourism. Michigan's tourists website is one of the busiest in the country," is to imply the second sentence is evidence/proof of the first.--Loodog 02:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)