Talk:Lonely Planet

"controversy"

An anon using two IPs has twice put in a POV paragraph saying that Lonely Planet reflects a colonial output. I've reverted it both times, since it lacks sources or any reason for being written, actually. A similar complaint can be made about most travel literature - which might be legitimate thing to have in wikipedia, but not just dumped here. - DavidWBrooks 21:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lonelyplanetlogo.png

Image:Lonelyplanetlogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

history of dominating Indonesia??

Why does the history section busy itself with a paragraph on LP's presence in Indonesia?

To me that reads as totally irrelevant. I propose to move that to the LP Indonesia page (if it exists) and remove it from the general history of Lonely Planet.85.227.226.174 17:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

other languages

Today lonely planets are avaliable in several languages. On the LP homepage you find links to german, french, spanish, italian, chinese and japanese sites. Perhaps there are also other languages offered. In german for example only 38 books are avaliable so far. I believe a small section about other languages would be appropriate. -- 89.61.119.54 14:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

fabrication claim

Lonely Planet author Thomas Kohnstamm claimed that he fabricated information in the book, that he never went to one of the countries, Columbia.[1] Is this notable? Shawnc (talk) 06:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's very notable, he's the author/co-author of a dozen LP books. This is still very new, but it should probably have a heading of its own in the article. Probably the biggest scandal ever to hit LP. JdeJ (talk) 07:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

If you read the LP japan for example, and travel there you get the impression that the writer(s) have gone to a different country... --Godal (talk) 11:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed! Having lived and traveled extensively in China for a year, I (and every other person in our group) can tell you that those guides were shite. The "map" of the city we lived in was a measly 4k bloc that didn't even include all of one of its 6 districts. 67.188.79.209 (talk) 12:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

"chinglish"

Has anyone read the history secotion? It reads like an insimpit version of Shanghai history by the PRC. It really needs to modified ASAP.... very suprised it hasn't been edited in ages. - [[User:Aruhnka|aruhnka]01:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Overall cleanup

I cleaned up this article as best as i could, incorporating most of the comments above. the introuction was completely outdated, and the history section was a mess. i used a radio interview with Tony Wheeler (the founder) for some of teh facts. Mtl1969 (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Bias

Perhaps a paragraph about alledged bias of their guides should be added to the controversy section. For example, http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=78&x_article=200 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.80.186 (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Guidebooks, almost by definition, are a collection of opinions: they include this city but not that one, this hotel but not that one, praise this sight but criticize that one, mention this bit of history but not that one. Almost every sentence in any guidebook could be labeled as "bias" (a loaded word which implies that your opinion is true while theirs is deliberately wrong) by somebody who prefers a different slant. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

-> Obviously that's the case with traveller's concerns, namely restaurants, hotels and attractions, but when a guide book is taking a politicised view of the country's history, then there is a problem.

The article you're referring to is 8 years old and is from an organization that is criticised for providing a very biased view on things itself. So i don;t think this provides any reason to add this kind of criticism. Mtl1969 (talk) 13:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

-> yes but the bias of this organisation against criticism of Israel does not mean that it is inherently anti-guidebook or anti-lonely planet, therefore your point that the article is useless doesn't stand. There are of course other sources:

http://travel.booklocker.com/2008/07/23/lonely-planet-goes-all-fair-and-balanced-on-us/

http://www.reviewscout.com/1864502770

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2008/07/why-are-guidebo.html