Talk:Destination Hotels

Not an article, but an ad

My favorite offending excerpt:

"Tarrytown House Estate & Conference Center – Enjoying the distinction of being the nation's first conference center, it was established in the Hudson Valley in 1840. Tarrytown House is a Westchester hotel and a national landmark located in Tarrytown, NY."

This needs a rewrite. Perhaps it needs a section regarding labour relations?

Perhaps some sources other than the corporate website are needed.

Lastly, few of the hotels that are listed are encyclopedic. If they get an entry, so shall my neighborhood Sleep Inn. Dirtydan667 22:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I edited the Tarrytown House Estate description as to not sound so subjective. Other than that the article does not read like an advertisement to me. It seems to go along the same lines as any other hospitality company article listed on Category:Hotels_in_the_United_States, such as Radisson Hotels and others. The author was descriptive in naming each hotel they manage and shouldn’t be penalized for that. I think its adds to the entry and its better then just having a list.

I don’t understand how adding a “section regarding labor relations” helps. What does that have to do with Destination Hotels? Also not all hotel on Wikipedia are encyclopedic yet they have an entry. Eswiki 20:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I did write "perhaps," didn't I? This aggrandizing jumble of an article is a corporate ass-kiss, as it stands. It is basically a corporate website's "About Us" page copied and pasted into a Wikipedia article, which naturally serves a limited purpose. In response to that, and I read the trade rags and do respect this company (so I'm motivated properly), perhaps the article should have more depth. For instance, who started the company? Labour relations was just a suggested topic, but now that I think about it, perhaps a bit more history is needed. How about some corporate milestones? That's a popular feature in articles regarding corporations.

:::Also not all hotel on Wikipedia are encyclopedic yet they have an entry.

Somehow, that does not make it right. However, I do concede that The Driskill is encyclopedic. I'm sure the Doubletree O'Hare doesn't, however, deserve an article (in this context). Many things don't deserve articles, but adding more useless, near-orphaned articles won't help things.

The bottom line is that until sources other than the corporate website are used, this article will continue to seem like a corporate ass-kiss and an advertisement. I've got some ideas and will roll them out as I get the time. The goal is to help the article, not see how long we can have a substandard article out there about our favorite company. Dirtydan667 21:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Properties

I deleted most of the properties, except the ones that had articles (though a couple of those don't seem particularly notable to me) and the Tarrytown one, which seems to be notable enough. The rest, unless they truly merit an article (for instance, if they have a notable effect on a particular location's economy like Sunriver does for Bend, Oregon), don't need to be included. If articles get written on any remaining *notable* properties, then perhaps they can be added back on a case-by-case basis. It would probably be better to discuss the additions here first. P.S. Anyone connected with this corporation--please read about conflict of interest. Thanks. Katr67 23:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this article. It's hard to do a good article, especially since the company itself barely meets the notable company criteria (does it, though?). Advertising is unacceptable, which is why I tagged this article the moment I came across it. The article made it seem as if there were a corporate decision to spam Wikipedia with a vanity article. Dirtydan667 23:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the link to the Gant

I wrestled with the idea before I added it. I thought it would add to the experience for the reader, but now that I think about it, I can't condone one type of advertisement while being so critical of others. Thanks...I'll take it out. Dirtydan667 23:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Destinationhotelsresorts.gif

Image:Destinationhotelsresorts.gif 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 Wikipedia articles 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 23:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)