Talk:Tourism/Archive 1

message: Was King George III really the first tourist? Just because he took trips to Weymouth when in poor health? Surely somebody must have done the same before the 18th century. Unless somebody can provide some sort of proof of this "widely acknowledged" fact, I'm going to erase it.
Peregrine981 23:13, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: George may not have been the first tourist, but is responsible for the rise in popularity of tourism. --Steinsky 02:04, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we could include an explanation of why George III's trips to Weymouth led to a rise in popularity for tourism. Does this apply only to the British or is it a more wide spread European phenomenon? --Peregrine981 19:26, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Tourist 

message: Shouldn't we add the word recreational into the first sentence: "to include recreational any travel outside of one's normal working or living area, from daytrips to overseas holidays" otherwise it reads so as to include business travel, which I do not think is ever included in tourism? --BozMo|talk 14:43, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing word 

message: Does anyone know of a place where I might find international stats on tourism? I'm particularly hoping to find out how much the international market is worth, and which countries contribute the most, if such information is available (my Googling and wiki searching had been for naught). JKnight 23:30, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)
Yes - if you want to pay for it! Organisations such as IPK International or Global Insight can provide the data. 80.43.102.213 20:55, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles relating to Tourism 

message: The term tourism is sometimes used pejoratively, implying a shallow interest in the societies and natural wonders that the tourist visits. As such it is used as a pejorative term about heterosexuals who visit gay bars to "watch the natives" and "experience the culture" without integrating themselves into it (unlike a Dyke Tyke), or bisexuals, typically already in a heterosexual relationship, who frequent gay bars for the purpose of procuring one-off gay sex (both terms are used almost exclusively by the gay community).
Does this seem a little esoteric (especially for the top of the page), or is it just me? --Quercus 20:11, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraphs 

message: What effect does globalization have on tourism industry?  I think that for answering this question we need the year from which we may say that globalization started.  Kindly update me if anyone has any ideas about the topic.  I doing some search on the same and will post my views as soon as i get through.
bingo
:---------- --61.2.53.90 15:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effect of globalization 

message: This article does nothing for the industry of travel guide/guide book, and to subsume the series into
'consumer guides' is misleading.  There is a need for a separate article on the subject, as this
tourism article does not even give the industry a sufficient coverage.vcxlor 11:18, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism Guide/ Guide Book/ Travel Guide 

message: Why did sun-and-beach holidays become popular in the first place?  Has anyone got any links or citations? GCarty 12:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of sun-and-beach tourism 

message: I have added some definitions relating to Tourism. It'll make things a little clear.Merishi 07:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Definitions 

message: The main countries mentioned by an overly large extent are England and France, which seems overly biased
:I agree; much more is needed, for example, on the rise of German tourism after WWII...the Germans are currently the world's most prevalent tourists. Cjs2111 00:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly British 

message: I suggest the possibility of a Criticism of Tourism section.  Tourists are widely considered to be boorish and ill mannered, or to otherwise behave in opposition to local customs and values, and tourism is frequently the subject of mixed emotions by locals for a variety of reasons.  --Xyzzyplugh 11:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of tourism? 

message: Breaching on the subject of the 2010 Football World Cup, will South Africa be ready? It is speculated that the major infracture changes needed will cause the most hiccups. How will South Africa cope with the added influx of football tourists over such a short period of time. http://www.bougainvillas.co.uk 11:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not add in-line advertising links. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. → friedfish 12:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Football tourism in South Africa 

message: Hello everyone, I managed to get the school where I work to test out Wikiversity and load some of their resources. Here are their handouts stripped from their MSWord format and loaded as text into a Wikiversity page called Tourism Industry. After doing it, I realised that it would probably be better suited as a wikibook.. I searched "tourism industry" in wikipedia and it redirected to this page? I guess that's fare enough, but I'd like to see some of the content we have loaded into Wikiversity, be covered in this wikipedia article. What do others think? --Leighblackall 01:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism Industry notes in Wikiversity 

message: .... and kindly contribute to these new articles when you get time, and request others too.
See Wildlife of India for reference.
Thanks
Atulsnischal 18:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Please create more "[[Wildlife of .....]]" articles for all countries.''' 

message: If you are interested in Environment, Wildlife, Conservation and Nature etc. please join in to contribute, even starting off with making new stub class articles will be a great contribution.
Sincerely
Atulsnischal 16:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We need senior administrators or people who are long in Wikipedia to help us with the templates and for other further helps. Details can be seen in its talk page. IT's urgent. We want this wkiproject to be added to the exsisting WP:IND banner. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 05:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Invitation for [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas of India]] & Conservation''' 

message: Here is a link with the CORRECT rankings: http://www.euromonitor.com/Top_150_City_Destinations_London_Leads_the_Way  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.25.176.40 (talk) 19:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with ranking 

message: Instead of being a picture of tourists at the Trevi Fountain, as the caption claims, this is a rather racy picture of a wall painting of the Mexican actrice Gloria Trevi advertising the scandal apparently associated with her - in spanish. 
Does anyone have a picture of the Fountain with tourists that they can put up to fix this problem?
NadiaLala 09:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replace the picture of the Mexican actrice Gloria Trevi with the old image that was there before. For some reason I had to reupload the image. The image of the lady was a reupload of the original fountain image that I have restored. Have another look at the article. --Ad@m.J.W.C. 06:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with the "Trevi Fountain, Rome, Italy picture" 

message: Two images on Peru, and one each on Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Costa Rica. Seems like the South Americans have taken over this article. Can't believe the article has no image on China and India! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.210.59.31 (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of global representation 

message: I would like to suggest that this section of Winter Tourism be removed, as it has nothing to do with Tourism or winter sports in general:
Organized sport was well established in Britain before it reached other countries. The vocabulary of sport bears witness to this: rugby, football, and boxing all originated in Britain, and even tennis, originally a French sport, was formalized and codified by the British, who hosted the first national championship in the nineteenth century, at Wimbledon.
Mcdanimr 22:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it certainly seemed to give off "POV vibes" and was somewhat irrelevant, too, as you said, so I went ahead and removed the paragraph. There has been sufficient time (4 months at the time of this writing) to present rationale and alternative formulations but evidently nobody came to defend this section, so off it went. --jibun≈παντα ρει≈ (keskustele!) 03:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winter Tourism 

message: :The result was no merger. -- Luke! 10:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also highly disagree with the merge. DXRAW 08:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Hospitality Industry 

message: Instead of having a long see also list should there be a navagation box instead, it could include tourism links for all the major citys and whatever is in the see also list of this article as well. you could add it to all the other articles about tourism and have the whole subject networked.
similar to this and this 
Mindys12345 09:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also list or world tourism navigation box 

message: I don't mean to be a typical, complaining American, but it seems like most of this article relates to Britain, and nowhere is there a reference to any American tourism. It'd be stupid to say there's no international tourism to America, so shouldn't there be some mention? --164.113.31.209 13:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add it if you think it is lacking. 122.104.167.139 (talk) 08:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Britainified 

message: The New York Times has coined a new term: Tourism of Doom ie. Doom tourism. Touring natural sites that are under threat from global warming etc.. -- 71.191.131.7 (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism of Doom 

message: The graph near the bottom of the page is inconsistent with the list near the top. On the list France is receiving the most international tourist per year, in the graph it's the US. Obviously only one is correct, I don't care which one, but i think one or the other should be corrected. Unfortunately I don't have a clue which one is correct. Knijert (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, the list is talking about amount of tourist per year and the graph about tourism receipt per year. Still strikes me as odd that tourist spend so much more in the US than in France or Spain...Knijert (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That probably has something to do with the euro/dollar parity. Basar Kizildere (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Many tourists, and not only from the Third World, do lots of shopping in the U.S., which is not necessarily the case in Europe, where prices are higher for electronics, clothes, etc. With a weak dollar against many currencies, there is an additional incentive to do shopping in the U.S.. Another factor is that tourism in Europe include many tourists from EU countries, who do not do as much shopping in their neighboring countries. Mariordo (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The graph is inconsistent with the list 

message: The first two tables use the convention of a '.' holding a decimal place, but the third uses the ',' . Would it not look better to be consistent? I would favor the period, as it is more commonly used in the wiki. BobertWABC (talk) 19:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism Statistics 

message: Can someone please explain why large parts of the article, largely relating to the historical development of the industry, have been removed? If there is no adequate eplanation forthcoming, I will take steps to revert to the original text, though without eliminating subsequent contributions.
--Train guard (talk) 14:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: because they contained no citation whatsoever, appeared to be a copy and paste, and represented a totally Britishcentric view of tourism. violated WP:CITE , WP:COPY and WP:UNDUE Michellecrisp (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Completely support Train guard position, it was not only rude but against Wiki policy to do such unconsulted delete, especially in a page with so many contributing editors. In favor of undoing right away and just put the  tag where necessary. Then, Michellecrisp can open a discussion here to propose and justify if something has to go. Mariordo (talk) 21:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

text: The other editor is indeed the creator of Wikipedia! Jimbo Wales. Ethical? this is not a moral decision. Whilst you might not have not agreed with my edits it is not unethical and in fact consistent with WP:CITE and WP:UNDUE. I'll happy create a new article with some of the deleted text, History of British tourism . it will require a lot of citation that was considerably lacking or non existent. But for the moment, the Tourism article should concentrate on global trends not individual countries, this is my point on WP:UNDUE. there is no way this article could contain history of tourism of many different countries. Michellecrisp (talk) 14:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with your proposal. In the end, the material that will be left here should be just a summary. Mariordo (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gutting of the Article 

message: Why does grey nomads redirect here when there is no mention of the concept in the entire article?
: Grey nomads article has now been deleted. Michellecrisp (talk) 14:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grey Nomads 

message: As one editor pointed out last year, this article is not a vacation photo album. So please refrain from posting your favorites pictures, as all the time the article's layout is messed up with pictures of places not even mentioned in the article, or not so notable in the international tourism industry, or claiming to be the "the largest..", "the most...", etc. without a WP:RS. I just did some preliminary cleaning to improve the layout, but I proposed we open a discussion to establish here some criteria among contributing editors to define which pictures. A first criteria could be:
::* To keep only those pictures of notable places, attractions or destinations that are mentioned in the article regarding international tourism, with preference with related with any of the top 10 or top 50 countries, cities or attractions, and properly sourced (RS) in the text or caption.
Please post any other criteria or make suggestions to improve the above. --Mariordo (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criteria for posting pictures 

message: I don't think the "most visited cities" section is entirely relevant for this article because: 1) the statistics came from 2006; at the very least we should've been using 2007 data by now given there is already a year in-between. 2) the study is done by an organization called Euromonitor, and unless the statistics came directly from UNWTO, I don't think it should've been given that much significance.  The "most visited attractions" section falls under the same category.--DerechoReguerraz (talk) 04:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * I disagree, because: 1) UNWTO published the 2007 data just 3 weeks ago in the June Barometer (the ref provided), that is why I did update all UNWTO statistics until this weekend. Therefore, 2006 is not as old as it looks. 2) Most UNWTO data is not available for free in the public domain, you have to buy the reports with detailed and more disaggregate info, and these reports are expensive (check UNWTO web site). 3) As it happens in many industries where large databases are not freely available in the public domain, there are specialized firms doing data mining and analysis to provide intelligence info and forecasts, Euromonitor is one of those firms providing intelligence services (check their website to confirm). So we are lucky they provided the info on most visited cities for free, available in public domain. Besides, such lists are not as old as you assumed, given that it was published in October 2007 and the 2007 data from UNWTO was published just a few weeks ago. Any of such intelligence analysis regarding international tourists without a doubt is totally or partially based on UNWTO data, since all goverments participating send their data to WTO, it is the primary source in the industry. 4) The case of the Forbes ranking is different, because they are considering domestic tourists too, which WTO does not report, and the website clearly states it is they own research and estimates. 5) However I think Forbes is a WP:RS, as well as Euromonitor, and if you skim through the article you will notice that most of the info is not sourced at all, and by the rigorous criteria you are suggesting to apply most of the article will have to go. The statistics section is properly reference from RS, so I do not see enough justification to delete this tables from the article. Let's wait for other opinions.--Mariordo (talk) 11:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most visited cities 

message: How the National Mall or Times Square could be considered "attractions"? They are just crowded places. Attractions should be measurable, i.e. a place with tikets, access restriction and such. --89.97.35.70 (talk) 18:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a WP:RS to support your claim? Then the Monumental Axis in Brasilia, Brazil, is not an attraction because they decided not to charge to contemplate at Oscar Niemayer's buildings? --Mariordo (talk) 01:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree with the poster of the October 5th. Not only it's meaningless to consider a street or a square as the equivalent of any kind of building or natural sites, but more importantly the list only consider a selected amount of visited squares or streets, and not necessarily the most visited worldwide. Just a few examples : there are 12 million people visiting Notre-Dame in Paris, I'm very sceptic about the idea that the Champs-Elysées are less visited than this cathedral. We could say the same about Saint Peter's Square in Rome or La Rambla in Barcelona. Metropolitan (talk) 11:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Most visited attractions" are a total joke 

message: Gambling Tourism redirects here, but the article speaks nothing of it. Drakon09 (talk) 17:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gambling Tourism 

message: Hello. I think this webpage should be updated because I've found many links that confirm that Canada gets 35 million annual tourists every year. Thank you
http://www.justlanded.com/english/Canada/Canada-Guide/Travel-Leisure/Getting-there
http://www.kanetix.ca/insurance-travel-visitors-to-canada
http://www.gapyear.com/visas/1166387
http://www.visabureau.com/canada/canadian-visa.aspx
Have a great day  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.75.103 (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Are these referring to international tourism or just domestic ones.  The UNWTO publishes the official World Tourism rankings regarding tourist statistics.--DerechoReguerraz (talk) 08:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The definition of UNWTO is standardize and used by all countries, allowing comparisons. National stats includes tourists that are not considered such by UNWTO, as they sometimes included other kind of tourists. For example, Americans crossing the border in Niagara Falls and not staying overnight in Canada are not counted as international tourist by UNWTO. Neither are cruise passenger spending the day in Costa Rica or Bahamas. Mexico has millions of Americans crossing the border to Tijuana and not staying overnight. So, national statistics must be avoided as we are not sure if they are compatible with UNWTO.Mariordo (talk) 18:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canada 

message: Why isnt there an update for world tourist arrivals and receipts for the year 2008?
I need the statistics and rankings  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.133.160.14 (talk) 08:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless you are a member of WTO or purchase one of their reports, there is no way to access the statistics for free, until they are posted for public viewing, which is usually after they are about a year old. --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The publicly available list is usually available until January, so indeed we will have to wait for the update.-Mariordo (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Updated! The UNWTO Tourism Highlights 2009 Edition presented the data we were waiting for, but please note that for the time being there is not a direct link to the pdf. Please contribute updating the texts accompanying the tables, particularly regarding the effects of the 2008 crisis.-Mariordo (talk) 22:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  top international tourism destinations - FOR 2008 

message: I added Lalibela and Timbuktu to the images just to show the full range of world destinations. These are by no means second-rate destinations in comparison to any of the sites they are with. (actually, they are probably more impressive than many of them) I also added an image for "dark tourism" and finished off image list. Puchiwonga (talk) 02:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Representation 

message: I have recently added some great pictures into gallery in this article, i wish it can explain and describe some great places in the world, although they are only pictures
the pictures i have added are :
:File:Santa Cruz de Tenerife (1).jpg, :File:Puncak - Bogor - West Java.jpg, :File:Uluru sunset1141.jpg, :File:Ha long bay.jpg, :File:160 Amazing Patagonia.jpg, :File:All Gizah Pyramids.jpg.
......good day, thanks--Sweetmistery (talk) 06:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added links to the photo files above and have removed the gallery from this talk page, since it was duplicating what is already on the main page, and because of the WP:NOTREPOSITORY policy. --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

text: yup, may be it was too much pictures in the gallery in this article, thank you for having fixed it,--Sweetmistery (talk) 05:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, I'm still working on moving some more pics over to their respective "Tourism in ..." articles, which amazingly, some do not have any pictures in their articles! --Funandtrvl (talk) 06:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New pictures in gallery 

message: I have tagged this article with the cleanup template: , because photos keep getting added to the article. Because there are over 200 sovereign countries, this article cannot display photos from every single country, nor even more than a smattering of them. In fact,  has over 224 sub-categories and  has over 51 sub-categories. It is time to develop the articles on each country and important city, and move the photos from this main article to those articles, because many of those country-specific articles, such as Tourism in Germany, are still rated as stubs and need expansion. Any suggestions to which photos should stay and which should be moved? --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully supportive of this post - 80% of the photos should be removed - as a minimum. Photos should not be of landmarks. Possibly one or two could show landmarks AND tourism. They should certainly be specifically linked to article prose. --Merbabu (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: PS – I removed the gallery photos (because that was easy!). The plethora of images down the side of the page should also be largely removed. They have nothing to do with the article text. The article discusses Tourism. Its title is not “List of Tourist Icons around the World”. --Merbabu (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for all your help and support. It's an improvement already! --Funandtrvl (talk) 03:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job, it was about time to clean up the clutter, the article was looking like a vacation photo album. Let's keep it clean, though eventually we might decide in some objective criteria for pictures to be added (I have already tried unsuccessfully in the past).-Mariordo (talk) 03:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many photos 

message: What  does "for leisure, business and other purposes not related to the  exercise of an activity remunerated from within the place visited"  exactly mean, can you clarify it. English is not my main language. Kasaalan (talk) 21:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't it mean that if you are earning money (working) in the foreign place that you are supposedly visiting, then you're not considered a tourist, but rather an employee or some type of worker? --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

text: This is to distinguish workers from others such as visitors to a business conference or travelling salesmen. A travelling salesman is a tourist. He is remunerated/paid by an employer in his/her home country. A grape-picker is not a tourist as he/she is remunerated/paid locally.  Kwenchin (talk) 09:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition,  what does it mean 

message: I thought that we agreed that Euromonitor is not a reliable source (despite their few words about their "new" methodology). Most of the figures aren’t surprising, but still, in the (only?) case of Paris, they counted only the hostel rooms. We just have to roughly compare this study with the UNTWO study: Bangkok is visited by 70% of Thaïland visitors: that’s understandable. London is visited by 50% of UK visitors: that’s understandable too. But, according to Euromonitor, Paris is visited by only 10% of France visitors... Lyon, Normandy, and French Riviera must be very, very crowded. Well, the source of Euromonitor is none other the Office du Tourisme et des Congrès (what a sought "new" methodology… - page 18,  http://en.parisinfo.com/uploads/9e//chiffres-cles-2009.pdf ; Hostel rooms for Foreign visitors : 8.375 ; Total : 15.04). On the same document (!), page 3, we can see that the (real) total number of visitors is estimated at 28 million. If we extrapolate, the (real) number of foreign visitors is around 15.6 M, or, at least, between 14 and 17 M., without mentioning Grand Paris leisure or business attractions like Disneyland, Versailles, La Défense, universities, or simply the numerous cheaper hostels around the city limits. The entire Ile-de-France region counts 45M tourists of which 60% are foreign visitors (around 27M). These figures are more coherent with the 80M France foreign visitors of the UNTWO study.
Euromonitor is either not rigorous or not totally impartial. This study is widely spread on the Internet and we still don’t know who is ordering it each year. But, since Euromonitor figures come from (selected) official figures, let simply the (appropriate) official figures on this article, which are maybe imperfect but at least original, verifiable and closer to the reality. En-bateau (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me, it's probably better to quote the individual CVBs anyways. Just a side note, I did contact the French CVB with the specific question of how many "foreign visitors" were there to Paris, and of course, they referred me to their publication that lists 28 million and doesn't break it down. Oh well, I tried, but I still think we need to quote "official" numbers instead of estimations, and I really don't know what to do about the French. --Funandtrvl (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there's simply no precise official number for Paris. Considering that, an estimation extrapolated from partial numbers is the best way to be closer to the reality. Another solution : give an interval (15-17M for Paris). We can keep the Euromonitor figures when there is absolutely no information, but frankly, on closer examination, when you see Kuala Lumpur visitors duplicate from a year to another or Antalya as visited as Paris... I update the list but I wonder if it's not better to remove completely this source. En-bateau (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

text: I think the Euromonitor's statisics are a bit speculative.  One observation is that the company is based in London, and for the past rankings, London was always ranked number 1.  If we are using the Euromonitor source, shouldn't London be ranked number 1 on this article as well?--DerechoReguerraz (talk) 06:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Euromonitor comes up with some odd numbers. I think if we can find a source from a respective CVB that concurs with the Euromonitor numbers, then use it, but for London, Euromonitor comes up with 15,033.2, and the official CVB stats list 14.8, so we erred on the side of caution. --Funandtrvl (talk) 15:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Well, that explains a few things! Thanks for the follow-up! --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Euromonitor list 

message: I find it somewhat disconcerting that List of tourist attractions worldwide was removed from the article, especially since it wasn't in Tourist attraction until I just put it there and THAT article is only mentioned or linked to in the fine print in the infobox at the bottom of this article.  The article doesn't even have "Visitor attractions" or "Tourist activities" as cats, or a way to find a list of the "Tourism in..." articles.  I wouldn't expect the casual reader to be able to get from this article to any of the articles containing attractions. Simesa (talk) 11:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I take part of that back - Tourism in present-day nations and states is in See Also. Simesa (talk) 11:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The section on Attractions in Tourism in the United States was abominable, so I Seealso'd List of tourist attractions in the United States. I've only checked a couple of the other "Tourisms in..." so far. Simesa (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

text: The Tourism article is the main article for the parent "Tourism" category, and the Visitor attractions and Tourist activities cats are sub-cats of the parent cat Tourism. That's why the Tourism article is in the top-level cats only. In order to keep this article from getting bloated or repeating things that are already in the sub- or descendent articles, this article is in more of an outline format. It's the sub or descendant articles that need to be developed for those specific topics like Tourist attractions, and this article needs to be developed for the specific types of Tourism, don't you think? --Funandtrvl (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists of attractions? 

message: The quote contributed to Antonio Tajani is highly contested, and thus requires both sides to be given equal weight for NPOV to be upheld. --BP OMowe 23rd of June, 2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.53.23.66 (talk) 23:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is much more than contested. It is an internet meme generated by a misleading headline, see this post, "Governments and Wikipedia" on a public relations blog. I have substantially revised the sections on tourism as a right on this article and on Antonio Tajani to emphasize the misleading headline. It seems to me the problem is that the article in the Sunday Times was not treated as the unreliable source it was revealed to be when the text of the Commissioner's speech was made available to us. Fred Talk 02:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism as human right 

message: The new figures visibly refer to the airport arrivals (9.67) but the same source give specifically the Bangkok figures (which seems include the different types of accomodation). Thanks to Thepowermancity1022 for this source, we looked for it for a long time. En-bateau (talk) 19:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bangkok statistics 

message: Md. Abdul Hamid 
As climate change gains global attention from events like the summit in Copenhagen held during December of 2009, the need for sustainable tourism is more important than ever (Deale and Barber, 2010). But the query simply arises who will proceed as the role player to make sure sustainable tourism development (STD)? The thinking is till now in infant level so an inclination of ‘pillow-passing’ among its stakeholders is noticed. Corporate bodies have come forward as ‘self-declared’ accountable faction in this endeavor. Now the concern arises, is it myth or really possible to ensure STD through performing corporate social responsibility (CSR)?
In other industries, more or less, CSR has been recognized as a part of business policy. For an unknown reason, in tourism industry, this is not so apparent yet. Fragmented ventures of societal responsibility is observed, the reason might be…tourism is neither a phenomenon nor a simple set of industries. It is a human activity, which encompasses human behavior, use of resources, and interaction with other people, economics, and environments (Eraqi, 2010). The good thing is that the awareness in this issue is increasing among its stakeholders. 
It is universal that the motive of business venture is to earn profit. Besides, it’s true that the actions of business impact the local, national, and global community, so businesses have a responsibility to ensure that the impact is positive (Becken, 2007). For this, this is highly desired that the companies will act in such way so that the natural resources can be used generation after generations. In other words, value cration represents for a firm a basilar survivor factor on the long run, contributing to social needs and benefits (Formisano, 2002).
Though most of the business organizations confess about their responsibility toward society, the basic question is: do the managers perceive CSR in the same way? A study on 1000 managers in eight large international firms concluded that the managerial perceptions of societal responsibilities differ in some respects from the mainstream models found in the CSR and business ethics literature (Pedersen, 2010). If they ‘point their guns’ in different targets, how will it be possible to achieve unique goal from this venture? 
On the other hand, while the notion of CSR is increasingly evident in the corporate world, among many civil-society advocates and in public policies it is ambiguous and contested on various grounds (Carroll, 1999), just like the concept of ‘sustainable development’ is contested and disputed. Many different approaches have been identified (Redclift, 1997; Hopwood et al., 2005; Redclift, 2005) and the contribution of CSR to sustainable development can be questioned (Moon, 2007).
Conflict between shareholders and management, on CSR issue, is not new at all. From the very beginning, it is being tough to make the shareholders understand that through CSR practices they will earn benefit in the long run. As most investors expect revenue in the short term, it creates problem in the board meetings! Some educators and researchers also ‘add fuel in this flame’. For example, Friedman argues (1970) that the only responsibility of the managers is to increase shareholder value. As only businessmen have given them money to do business so the executives should ensure desired return for them. 
The craze (or appeal) of CSR is being deemed gradually also. Many studies have shown that the corporate decision makers calculate their ‘interest’ at first before launching any social welfare program. And so, aware publics are considering so called CSR as nothing but a ‘strategic weapon’ of gaining marketing goals. On the other side, in a report The Economist strongly criticized “acting ‘good’ and advertising it may elicit charges of hypocrisy, leading other companies to decide that CSR might be more trouble than it’s worth”. The logic behind this dispute is once this social responsibility might be a matter of ‘showcase’ and unfair means can be adopted to gain name and fame by the companies.
Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (1993) mention that the sustainable tourism is an economic development model conceived to improve the quality of life for the local community, and to facilitate for the visitor a high-quality experience of the environment, which both the host community as the visitors depends. Moreover the pursuit of sustainability is never-ending. Environmental conditions and patterns of resource use are dynamic and interact in complex ways (Lebel, 2010).
In this process the main parties are companies and customers. The corporations are speaking for ‘social responsibility’ but what about customers? The findings do not show very positive somewhat. Evidence in the UK shows that less than 1% of all outgoing holidays booked in the UK give any real priority to the environment (Mintel, 2005). Boon, Flucker, and Wilson (2008) test the effect of a 10 year program of awareness reising to promote ecological sustainable tourism in south east Australia and conclude that the program had almost no effect over the period. In response, different education programs are proposed. 
Finally it can be said, only orporate bodies will not be able to take the charge. Even if they try, it will not bring so mentionable output. And very simply, they will not attempt to make annoyed their king (Consumer is the king: Paul Mazur). So, the hope of achieving STD through CSR is very far from the reality. We have to change ourselves to ensure sustainability of nature as well as tourism industry. At last it can be quoted - The behavior change literature underlines the necessity of examining tourism and people’s willingness to adapt to more sustainable lifestyles (Miller, 2010).
References:
Barnea, A. and Rubin, A., (2010) ‘Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders’ Journal of Business Ethics, Springer 2010.
Becken, S. (2007)  ‘Tourists’ perception of international air travel’s impact on global climate and potential climate change policies’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15 (4), 358-368)
Boon, P., Fluker, M., and Wilson, N. (2008). A ten-year study of the effectiveness of an educative programme in ensuring the ecological sustainability of recreational activities in the Brisbane Ranges National Park, South-Eastern Australia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol 16 (6), 681-697.
Brammer, S. and Millington, A. (2005) ‘Corporate reputation and philanthropy: An empirical analysis’, Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 29-44.
Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (1993) ‘Sustainable tourism: An evolving global approach’ Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1, 1-5
Carroll, A.B. (1999) ‘Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct’, Business and Society, 38 (3), 268-295.
Cheung, D.K.K., Welford, R.J. and Hills, P.R., (2009) ‘CSR and the environment: Business supply chain partnerships in Hong Kong and PRDR, China, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 250-263.
Deale, C.S. and Barber, N. (2010), ‘Sustainability: What matters to students, educators, and hospitality and tourism professionals’; BEST EN Think Tank X paper.
Dobers, P. and Halme, M. (2009) ‘Corporate social responsibility and developing countries (editorial)’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 237-249.
Dorbes, P. (2009) ‘Corporate social responsibility: management and methods’ Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 185-191. 
Eraqi, M., I. (2010), Social responsibility as an innovative approach for enhancing competitiveness of tourism business sector in Egypt. Tourism Analysis, 15 (1), 45-55
Fougere, M. and Solitander, N. (2009) ‘Against corporate responsibility: Critical reflections on thinking, practice, content and consequences, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 217-227.
Friedman, M. (1970) ‘The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits’, New York Times Magazine, 13 September, New York.
Hopwood, B., Moller, M. and O’Brien G. (2005) “International codes of conduct and corporate social responsibility: Can transnational corporations regulate themselves?’, Transnational Corporations, 8 (1), 143-180.
Lebel. L., et al. (eds), ‘Sustainable production consumption systems: Knowledge, Engagement and Practice’, Springer Science + Business Media B. V. 2010, 1-12.
Miller, G., et al, (2010) ‘Public understanding of sustainable tourism’, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 37 (3), 627-645
Mintel (2005). Ethical holidays. London: Mintel-Leisure Intelligence.
Pedersen, E.R. (2010) ’Modeling CSR: How managers understand the responsibilities of business towards society’, Journal of Business Ethics, 91, 155-166.
Redclift, M. (2005), ‘Sustainable development (1987-2005): An oxymoron comes of age’, Sustainable Development, 13, 212-227.
Redclift, M., (1997), ‘Postscript: Sustainable development in the twenty-first century: The beginning of history’, Policies of Sustainable Development: Theory, policy and practice within the European Union, Baker, S., Kousis, M., Richardson D. and Young S. (eds), Routledge: London; 259-268.
Schwartz, B. and Tilling, K. (2009) ‘ISO-lating’ corporate social responsibility in the organizational context: A dissenting interpretation of ISO 26000’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16, 289-299.
Md. Abdul Hamid: Assistant Professor, Dept. of Business Administration, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Bangladesh  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.197.36.109 (talk) 22:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ensuring STD through CSR: Idealism versus Realism 

message: Who the hell put Tanzania on the list of ski holiday destinations??? Funny, but there might be readers who believe it! There are nice ski resorts in Iran and even one Ski slope in Dubai (of all the places!) but surely NONE in Tanzania or Kenya; 91.98.113.164 (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just do a google search, I found over 6 ski resorts on Mt. Kili. --Funandtrvl (talk) 20:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tanzania Winter tourism??? 

message: There is not enough 2010 datas. Please add this tourism datas.
Thank you. 
From Turkey  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.27.14.129 (talk) 10:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is 2010's tourism datas? 

message: I had found a reliable source, that is "Euromonitor" which releases the figures of top cities with most number of international visitors all around the world every year.
Here is the link of the figures for the year 2009: Euromonitor International’s top city destinations ranking 2009.
We should add the figures according to this source, so that we will be able to get the latest figures from ONE precise and reliable source for all the cities and we will overcome the dispute, whether which city hosted the top number of visitors. Because at present the raking is not according to one source even not for one year, like some figures are of 2010 and other are for 2009. It might be the case that some figures are not accurate and some are accurate. What do you say ???
Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see #About the cities and the attractions rankings above. Euromonitor is not a reliable source, because we have found that their numbers don't always match what the Official Tourism Boards & Ministries put out. Unless you can find the figure on an official gov't website, then it needs to be reverted. --Funandtrvl (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

text: London is always a little late, so is Dubai. I'll see if the info's out yet. --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

text: My estimation seems right : the UNWTO study for 2010 gives 9.16M visitors. Let's take this source. En-bateau (talk) 16:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top visited cities in the world.... 

message: The amount of Turkish territory in Europe is ridiculously small as to be considered part of it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.181.224.206 (talk) 11:15, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We follow the source (WTO) which categorises Turkey in Europe. Cordially, En-bateau (talk) 16:07, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Turkey be considered a part of Asia rather than of Europe? 

message: To give expenditures per capita, that's not a "detail" but the main purpose of this table, just like GDPs in economy. The principle of "per capita" is exactly to divide the total expenditure by the total population, I don't why it is a problem. The total expenditures have no sense if you don't foreground the fact that, it absolutly not reflects the reality of tourism economy in each country. For example, Americans, who are on the top of the table, spend four time less than Australians, who are far behind. That's the main purpose of these statistics. The numbers are proposed on dollars (not in local currencies), even with the parity problem, I think it's quite useful.En-bateau (talk) 13:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  International tourism expenditures 

message: In 'International tourism receipts' some one put on the graph that Hong Kong was in Europe,it's corrected now.
Just a post to let you be aware of people with a very,very small understanding of geography might be editing this so keep an eye out for misinformation. 
(77.102.214.131 (talk) 08:06, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  misinformation 

message: For Turkey: Antalya is not on the top visited list, but istanbul is there. And there are several sources state that Antalya attracts much more tourists than Istanbul. i.e in this source Antalya ranked 4th while istanbul 9th. Yakamoz51 (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ranking data seems wrong 

message: En-bateu, I would like to know why you trimmed the international stat tables, which for a long time had at least data for the latest three years (check the article history since 2008). Is it OK with you if I restore at least 2009 and 2010.--Mariordo (talk) 23:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact I thought it was more relevant and cleaner to conserve only a column with the percentage of increase or decrease from the precedent year, but unfortunately, a user prefered to remove it (this is the subject of another topic above about International tourism expenditures). I prefer this system of growing column, I think that's more clear and relevant for users, but if you want to preserve the complete data for the latest three years, it's also OK for me. Cordially, En-bateau (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the explanation. I can restore the previous years and format it in such a way to keep the percentage change. Once I am finished with the update in the Spanish and Portuguese articles, I will indeed restore the stats. Cheers.--Mariordo (talk) 01:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  International stats 

message: Very important definition:
In 2001 Mr. David Martin Rendón of the Private University of Tacna - Peru, tourism is defined to science "The turismología" as: "Social Science of fact, given by an orderly process that includes different actions motivation, movement and use of space tourism, the plant that supports it, its structure and super structure of the homos turísticus ".
Yours comments pls?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turismologotcq (talk • contribs) 23:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling it a "very important definition" will necessitate a reliable source. After it is shown to be a notable definition, someone will have to write it in English of an encyclopedic style. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 01:02, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree with Just plain Bill, I didn't find any reference of this definition except from a blog. Cordially, En-bateau (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree also, I only found the statement in a personal blog, which is not a RS. Because the paragraph is poorly translated, I'm removing it. The UNWTO definition would be the standard. --Funandtrvl (talk) 20:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very important definition of tourism on the world 

message: Saudi Arabia has been visited by 10.85 million international tourists in 2010 (http://mkt.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights11enhr.pdf) : Mecca can't receive 13 million international tourists per year. Your source certainly added domestic tourists. Moreover, we quote only official sources here, not magazines. If you read arab, you may find some information on the official site of the city : http://www.holymakkah.gov.sa/. Cordially, En-bateau (talk) 20:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mecca 

message: can I edit this and improve it thanks Aylish (talk) 10:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Got qualifications in travel and tourism 

message: There is a logical mistake in this sentence in the second paragraph:
"In 2011, there were over 983 million international tourist arrivals worldwide, representing a growth of 4.6% when compared to US$ 940 billion in 2010."
The number 983 is 4.6% larger than 940. But they're comparing different units.
983 million tourists vs 940 billion dollars. So 1 international tourist equals $1,000?
We could reword that as:
"In 2011, there were over 983,000 thousand international tourist arrivals worldwide, representing a growth of 4.6% when compared to US$ 940 billion in 2010."
as say that it has experienced 104574.5% growth. Somebody just manipulating the units to make up that 4.6% number. --198.160.96.7 (talk) 18:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The source states a 4.6% growth; but the supporting data for that growth got mangled somewhere along the line.  I don't have time to fix it now, but should later today.  It's just a matter of using the attached refs to correct the statements. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logical mistake (1 tourist = $1,000?) 

message: Turkey reach in 2011 31.5m visitors. source: http://english.sabah.com.tr/Travel/2012/01/25/a-new-record-in-tourism-31456076 88.64.182.125 (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkey 

message: Medical tourism is not a part of the tourism. In fact even the name of medical tourism is quite disputable. It is merely the globalization of healthcare partly due to the destruction of the national health care sectors in developed countries. I suggest it to be removed from tourism section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khadkhall (talk • contribs) 15:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  medical tourism 

message: The table of most visited cities by international arrivals needs to be homogenised as soon as possible. It is meaningless in its current form. For instance, how can you compare the figure of 9.2 million visitors to Singapore in 2010 (a figure which excludes Malaysian citizens arriving by land) to the figure of 8.1 million visitors to Dubai in 2011 (which only includes hotel guests). The figures should come from a single source (UNWTO ideally) and be across the same year. I suggest using 2010 as the base year as that is the latest available data from UNWTO. Euromonitor International also has data for 2010 here:
http://blog.euromonitor.com/2012/01/euromonitor-internationals-top-city-destinations-ranking1-.html
but I can't vouch for their methodology.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarplum11 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you concerning the problem. Nevertheless, there's no other reliable data, no study made by UNWTO and Euromonitor uses the same official references without even mention the differences in the methodologies : that's why we have an observation column, to put each statistics into perspective. About the year, there's a difference of one year for only one city, I don't think it's a major problem. Cordially, En-bateau (talk) 18:28, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most visited cities by international tourist arrivals 

message: Hey turkey shows in europe country but Turkey is euro asia country that is euroasian. why do u show like this? only europe? Turkey have two contenents. plz. do euraasian country.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.231.13.90 (talk) 17:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Türkiye or Turkey 

message: I think the chapter "etymology" of this article is nearly entirely false : the origin of the word "tour" does not come from aramaic "tur", and I've never heard of a French aristocratic family called "della Tour" (this name is, by the way, a mixture between Italian "della" and French "tour" ; in French, it would have been "de la Tour"). The references given may also be false.--212.94.190.146 (talk) 12:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: In 1891, German businessman Albert Ballin started from Hamburg with first cruise ship Augusta Victoria in Mediterrean Sea.
178.3.30.47 (talk) 01:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  History: Begin of cruise shipping 

message: Shouldn't the definition of topics included at :Category:Tourism be expanded to include the concept of business tourism? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:37, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Tourism]] does not include "business tourism" 

message: Hello everyone! 
My name is Tori Roper, and I am an Indiana University student. As part of the course work for class focusing on 'Living in the Information Age', we all selected a Wikipedia article to analyze. My partner and I chose this article on tourism. 
Overall, we were very impressed about the quality of this Wikipedia article. It fulfills all of the goals of an online encyclopedia article; it provides a succinct overview of tourism as a term and then continues to provide a wealth of background information and references related to the topic while following Wikipedia's guidelines. The material seems to be bias-free because the term is presented from a very neutral perspective, and the structure makes the article very easy to read. This article is suitable for readers of many different levels of expertise. Whether it be a young student or a tourism professional, this article has educationally beneficial information for everyone. 
Throughout our evaluation, we noticed the long history of the article's editing process. After over a decade of hard work, it is easy to understand why the article has progressed so far since the original first draft which was posted November 14, 2001 :) We offer many congratulations and kudos to all of the editors who have helped bring the article to its current state. 
As far as suggestions, it is difficult to offer too many changes or improvements considering the impressive caliber of this article. The only constructive criticism we can offer would be to maybe discuss/mention some of the most popular global tourist attractions. For example, in your article, you tell us that the World Tourism Organization has declared France as the top country for attracting international travelers; therefore, it maybe it would be nice to include a small section about the Eiffel Tower, the Louvre, or any of the other attractions that stimulate tourism in their country. Also, incorporating more pictures throughout the article might cause readers to pay attention to the entire article instead of stopping after the initial summary. 
Once again, many congratulations on the article, best of luck with future edits! 
Tori Roper Toriroper (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Critique of this Wikipedia Page 

message: I am curious why you tell us the years that tourist and tourism are first used, but you don’t tell us who used the words and in what context?  You do give information in the credits section, but I think it would add value to the article if you gave more detail at this point.  You credit the Online Etymology Dictionary for the 1811 usage of tourism, but you don’t credit the same source for tourist, which gives a date of 1780.  Why wouldn’t you use the same source if it is available for both words?  You do reference Ralph Griffiths and his book Pennants Tour in Scotland in 1869, but that is in references, not in the article itself.  I think the context of these usages would add to the article.
Mainerinexile83 (talk) 00:27, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism and Tourist First Used Dates 

message: Dear Dmol, in my opinion chapter Controversies deserves place in the article . An article without critics is non-neutral, is it not? I think it is common in WP to collect critics under the subtitle Controversies. I excuse the language errors. Do you accept text return with language correction? You do agree with the fact, don’t you, that: Tourism is a significant contributor to the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This concerns us everybody. Watti Renew (talk) 16:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is not that the article is not neutral, but that adding the section you had was what we refer to as WP:UNDUE.   Too much emphasis on a relatively minor subject. <BR>Tourism can mean anything from a night at a local beach to a round the world cruise on the Queen Mary.  It is too broad a subject to have section on greenhouse gases, which could perhaps be correctly put in to the articles on airlines and cruise ships. (With neutral tone, of course).<BR>Actually, now that you asked, I do not agree with the statement that "Tourism is a significant contributor to the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere", but whether I do or not is irrelevant.--Dmol (talk) 03:20, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: I have removed the rankings of cities by MasterCard. Unlike the World Tourism rankings by the World Tourism Organization, where there is only one well-known barometer, there are quite a few different rankings on cities, and results are all varied and contradictory, such as the MasterCard and the Euromonitor International rankings.  The subjectivity and credibility of these cities rankings have been discussed in the past by other contributors, see Talk:Tourism/Archive_1#Most_visited_cities_list and Talk:Tourism/Archive_1#Cities_statistics.  I have also removed these charts previously.--DerechoReguerraz (talk) 11:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That discussion was about listing them by data from all sorts of different countries' stat agencies, which obviously use different methodologies in their count, substantially denting their credibility. However, MasterCard only uses one methodologies for all countries - By Wikipedia policies, this is more than reliable and you simply cannot remove a source simply because you think it is not "credible". Please do not introduce your judgement on whether they're credible or not. Since you have removed it without consensus, I'm reverting it to the stable version as per Wikipedia policies. Thanks. YJAX (talk) 05:29, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Rankings of cities

message: Given the startling figures for how much is spent globally on tourism each year I think we should see if we can add a section on Economics of tourism. RJFJR (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economics of tourism 

message: "Cruising is a niche form of tourism, a feature of which is that it typically touches more than one country but it typically does not touch any country."
What does this even mean? 109.76.225.79 (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cruising 

message: I'm missing a certain meaning of the term tourism from here and other online dictionaries as well.
It is the meaning when tourism is preceded by a word such as in benefit tourism, catastrophe tourism etc.
The definition is something like:
Traveling to a place for the purpose of abusing something happening or offered at the destination.
Well, as you can see it's not a perfect definition but you know what I mean and it's definitely a widespread, existing use of the term (especially in journalism and such) so it may be worthwhile to incorporate it somehow in the article.
Peace,
Stevie  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.206.41.100 (talk) 09:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing definition for a certain pejorative use 

message: " travel for recreational, leisure, family or business purposes" -- "Recreational" and "leisure" I can see; but "family" or "business"?  A traveler on a family visit or a business trip may or may not engage in tourism.  This definition seems not to leave any possibility for non-touristic travel.  (Taking "business" in the broad sense of livelihood, whether the traveler is a merchant, doctor, researcher, cleric, photographer, whatever.) Kotabatubara (talk) 23:27, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism confused with travel? 

message: This section is mainly discussing Thomas Cook who brought package tours to the masses.
It begins with a poor piece of politicising about only the wealthy being able to go on holidays abroad. To call them the "economic oligarchy" is not a fair or polite description. Factory owners, merchants, aristocracy, landed gentry and the wealthy in general were the only people who were able to afford the cost and the time off to travel.
To recount the history of affordable tourism with this sentence is not great: "A pioneer of the travel agency, Thomas Cook's idea to offer excursions came to him while waiting for the stagecoach on the London Road at Kibworth."
The Leisure Travel hyperlink below the title is circular and takes one back to the same page.[Special:Contributions/79.78.88.200|79.78.88.200]] (talk) 22:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emergence of leisure travel 

message: (Heading is in non-matching font)
This entry, as it is titled, is the most significant part of the Wiki and all it states is:
"Many leisure-oriented tourists travel to seaside resorts at their nearest coast or further apart. Coastal areas in the tropics are popular both in the summer and winter."
I don't think this is an entry of any validity on it's own, perhaps it is a joke.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.88.200 (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern day tourism 

message: Mass tourism is not a thing. The main subject is Tourism and today it has expanded hugely.
The section can discuss, as part of the whole Wiki, how the tourist industry has grown thanks to technology and economies of scale lowering costs to allow more people to travel. Increasing affluence, better holiday entitlement, larger aircraft, cheaper flight costs, the Internet - all have contributed to the boom of the industry.
To call it mass tourism and say "Mass tourism developed with improvements in technology, which allowed the transport of large numbers of people in a short space of time" sounds like a description of mass transit not tourism. Then in the next paragraph going back to discussing an 18th century seaside resort is not relevant to the heading.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.88.200 (talk) 22:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass tourism 

message: What would be the worldwide view of Tourism in history?
The mechanics of modern tourism involved the motor car, the train, the aeroplane, the ocean liner, the ferry, the touring car, the touring motorcycle, the touring bicycle (and the means to afford to buy them) all came about in the Western world primarily the UK, Europe and USA.
The development of the West was such that Tourism really took off there and so a history of the subject will naturally be skewed towards Europe as these were the great cultures that early tourists wanted to explore.
Yes, people in other parts of the world went on travels but these were mostly pilgrims, travellers and explorers. This was discussed in the first 2 sections and seems a fair balance.
The largest tourist nation, 11% of all travel, is China but this can only have begun in fairly recent times.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.88.200 (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History: "The examples and perspective in this section deal primarily with England and Europe and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject" 

message: Hi, I'd like to dispute the inclusion of the MasterCard Global Destination Cities Index here. While the headlines state the cities in the list are the "top ten most popular destinations of tourism" that's not quite correct. I mean, how's inland tourism less valuable or anything? It shouldn't matter for such a list where tourists are coming for. It could be linked, but I don't think it needs to be in the article, especially as it looks like some case of heavy MasterCard advertising. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 23:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As per WP:V, we have to put sources the way they were originally presented. All numbers ultimately are not perfect but the MasterCard publication is well sourced by reliable media, so we can't remove a source because we don't like the numbers. YJAX (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not clear what you mean by "well sourced by reliable media". Do you mean that the Mastercard Index is mentioned in some newspapers, for example, that we normally regard as reliable sources? Or that Mastercard have assembled their figures from reliable sources? Or something else? NebY (talk) 16:54, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well sourced I mean highly respected global media such as the BBC - See this: . Again, the list is going back not only because it is well sourced, but the Wikipedia process of achieving any sort of consensus was ignored to start with. You leave it to the stable version first before making controversial changes. YJAX (talk) 08:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  MasterCard Global Destination Cities Index out 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tourism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100922120940/http://pub.unwto.org/WebRoot/Store/Shops/Infoshop/Products/1034/1034-1.pdf to http://pub.unwto.org/WebRoot/Store/Shops/Infoshop/Products/1034/1034-1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120709215809/http://mkt.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights12enlr_1.pdf to http://mkt.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf/unwtohighlights12enlr_1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130228162347/http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_barom13_01_jan_excerpt_0.pdf to http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_barom13_01_jan_excerpt_0.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Tourism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111126143828/http://www.aiest.org/org/idt/idt_aiest.nsf/en/index.html to http://www.aiest.org/org/idt/idt_aiest.nsf/en/index.html
*Added  tag to http://www.unwto.org/facts/eng/pdf/barometer/UNWTO_Barom09_1_en.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.unwto.org/facts/eng/pdf/barometer/UNWTO_Barom10_update_august_en.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017122131/http://www.stmoritz.ch/en/winter/village/spirit-history/birthplace-of-winter-tourism.html to http://www.stmoritz.ch/en/winter/village/spirit-history/birthplace-of-winter-tourism.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100614084130/http://www.geog.nau.edu/publications/Long-Tail-Tourism-Lew.pdf to http://www.geog.nau.edu/publications/Long-Tail-Tourism-Lew.pdf
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130415231711/http://www.tourismconsumption.org/ to http://www.tourismconsumption.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040619001112/http://www.world-tourism.org/market_research/facts/market_trends.htm to http://www.world-tourism.org/market_research/facts/market_trends.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, I never edit wikipedia so sorry if this is in the wrong place but I wanted to bring it to someone's attention that there is a link on the Tourism Page. If you scroll to the bottom and click show in the purple section, under the category "types" there is a link called Child Sex  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sex_tourism.  I haven't clicked it but I am very concerned that it is there and find it highly inappropriate.  Please can someone have this removed. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:2E89:3E00:7590:5623:11B3:562D (talk) 00:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Concerned Reader

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tourism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111219230025/http://www.kulmhotel-stmoritz.ch/en/portrait/tradition-history/early-winter-tourism.html to http://www.kulmhotel-stmoritz.ch/en/portrait/tradition-history/early-winter-tourism.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:50, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Hi everyone! I'm here from Seneca College. I'm taking a course called The Tangled Web and my focus is on Tourism and media. I'm just doing a couple editing and talk page tests right now. 
My first task is to add a citation to a page and I was wondering if there was a particular item that might need some focus? If not, I'll try and find a good source, but any direction is appreciated. 
Thanks again!
Ashley.cochrane (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing for School Project 

message: tourism and terrorism is a topic which needs attention, for some reason, the literature abounds but the theme is not discussed in Wikipedia entry. some subsections are slim, much discussion is needed on dark tourism, slum tourism, war tourism and doom tourism..  Charles.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.168.57.106 (talk) 13:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  tourism and terrorism

message: Hey, @Sadads, what's your objection? —valereee (talk) 01:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @Valereee It was only removing a rather cryptic headline, in a tiny section that doesn't need to be broken up into subsections yet -- to create subsections you need to demonstrate that there is a nontrivial amount of content and sources covering that content on a subtopic. I actually find the whole section rather cryptic, and the title "basis" doesn't naturally describe was is contained within in -- would be happy to see more introduced clarity, Sadads (talk) 11:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @Sadads, that's fine. Edit summaries to explain to other editors your reasoning? They're helpful. :D —valereee (talk) 16:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  unexplained removal 

message: I want to know types of and Egypt place according to how many tourists come to Egypt 41.232.231.57 (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism 

message: What can be done to modernize and commercialize the Nepalese agriculture sector?
Explain with reasons. 36.252.231.8 (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economics