User talk:En-bateau

Most visited cities

Hi- Thanks for updating that table, I like your version better with the cities listed top to bottom, I was working on the old template in my sandbox over the weekend, and I did get more current numbers for London, Hong Kong, Bangkok and Paris, that only includes international visitors and it's the 2008 info, see User:Funandtrvl/Sandbox 2 (please note I've only updated cities #1,2,3,5, so far with current refs). I didn't include Mainland China visitors for Hong Kong, because they separate it out in their statistics, and if we would include French tourists to Paris, their figure would be the highest. If you take a look at the sandbox, and let me know, I can update the table in the near future or you may, since it's getting late here already! --Funandtrvl (talk) 04:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Funandtrvl, thanks for your remarks. I also prefer the « top to bottom » listing, notably because other cities could be added (like Barcelona or other famous destinations, as a guide). Thanks for the last statistics of London.

About Hong Kong, your source is more interesting but there’s a problem: it includes same-day visitors, normally excluded in the definition of tourist. However, if you want, we actually can give a number without mainland visitors (by a rapid calcul based on my source, we know that mainland China visitors are 9.4M (16.9-7.5) so « foreigner » travelers are 7.9M in reality.

For Bangkok datas, if Suvarnabhumi airport drains the majority of the visitors I don’t think it covers the totality and maybe some of those visitors are same-day travellers. You noticed that Bangkok statistics are very difficult to find ! Maybe we can indicate the both numbers (Euromonitor and Suvarnabhumi).

About the Paris case, I noticed that Euromonitor took the same reference of hotel arrivals of the precedent year! A lot of accommodations are not included in those statistics. The third page of this study says that Paris intra-muros has around 28 million visitors in total (much more than the 15.04 hotel arrivals we can see later). For the entire Ile-de-France region, the county council talks about 45M visitors of which 60% are from abroad (http://www.iledefrance.fr/english/sports-loisirs-tourisme/tourism/tourism/).

Now, we have to search for a good source of foreign travellers in Paris. If we don’t, we maybe can calculate this number according to the percentage of foreign travellers in hotels data (55,7 %) : It would make 55.7% of 28M (15.6 M, like my current source even I think it’s a coincidence). Meanwhile, we can keep the actual source.

Awaiting to read you, En-bateau (talk) 22:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-I read your edits and I will look over the statistics again to figure out which ones we should use. Sorry that I didn't get a chance to do it just yet! I think the statistics I was focusing on were the ones with the "original overnight stay" and not the ones that would include day travelers. Will ck out the figures again for the cities mentioned above and let you know, and plan to look up the figures for the rest of the cities, where needed. --Funandtrvl (talk) 03:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- About Rome being a most visited city, where is the 6.35 number coming from in the source? When I pull up the pdf, see: [1], and translate it, it says: "The foreign demand, despite the decline, yet continues to confirm the true strength of tourism in Rome. Arrivals and presence of foreigners in the capital were respectively 4,795,229 (-2.15%) and 12,994,178 (-2.64%). So wouldn't the 4.8 million be correct? Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 06:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Paris". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 10 July 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:31, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Paris, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 03:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Talkback

Hello, En-bateau. You have new messages at Gilderien's talk page.
Message added 22:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Global City

Hello, I reverted your edit of removing the Global Economic Power Index table secondary to the incorrect rationale you had stated in your edit summary. Contrary to your statement, the first and fifth columns actually represent new and useful information, as does therefore the sum table of five surveys - if anything, this is probably the most important, constructive, and telling table of all because it represents the integration of five major surveys. The reference itself is also reliable and highly insightful. To delete a huge quantum of salient information as well as its comprehensive and authoritative reference article without discussion like that goes directly against Wikipedia policy. Regards, Castncoot (talk) 05:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]