Talk:Edinburgh/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This 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.

Contents

Article Photo

Just noticed the photo has been changed for about the 50210951th time in the last year... ho hum... :) Taras 00:12, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

hopefully each is a 1.99159e-8 th better than its predecessor. Note, btw, that I propose to delete one image on Edinburgh Castle for legal reasons - see Talk:Edinburgh Castle for discussion. I think also the same may be necessary on Holyrood Palace, although I haven't uploaded a legal image yet. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:13, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Geography

Removed from the subject page: Edinburgh's building layout is a little unusual compared to a lot of cities, this is most likely due to the fact that it has grown slowly for centuries. The difference is that in standard human geography the structure of cities is based on concentrict circles, with a central financial/retail district, an outer industrial district and a middle residential district with out of town shopping malls located outwith the city limits (at least to start with). Edinburgh, however, is much better described as a large number of villages and towns that have slowly merged and left a pattern of greens, high streets and residential areas sprawlled throughout the city, with the little industry that Edinburgh has being mostly located in Leith (and more recently South Queensferry). Some areas were originally developed solely as residential area, such as Craigmillar with it's tower blocks and terraced housing, however without the large out of town shopping parks and the lack of large roads or mass transit (other than buses) these areas have degenerated into slums and are now being redeveloped along the lines of the rest of the city.

This is surreally wrong (except for Craigmillar being a slum). Apart from the oddity of having a couple of mountains within its limits, Ediburgh is very usual of its type. Almost an archetype.


Where does the idea come from that, as is suggested here, the zoned layout of post-world-war-II US towns is "standard human geography"?

Look at london... it has a central financial and retail district surrounded by housing (and in London's case miles and miles of surburbia ouside of _that_ to support the large business district in the center, though in London's case most of the Industrial areas are blobs in the suburbia or (historically) along the river Thames. How about Paris? Central business and retail district (granted a lot of tourist industry too) surrouned by residential with industrial area beyond that (those more in the center are slowly shifting outwards... Newcastle? central business and retail surrounded by residential (some old industrial stil extant, but slowly moving outwards) with more industry at the mouth of the Tyne that is slowly being replaced by tourist attractions as industry moves out of town... Ages of London, Newcastle and Paris... prolly getting on for as old as Edinburgh. Tokyo is an example that bucks the trend with light industry and residential being relatively mixed but it still has a distinctly retail, business and financial center... St. Andrews; mixed center of retail and residential with industry further out (though the majority of housing is outwith the center but nearer than the industry stuff... and your counter examples would be??

  • <:@) - I'm happy to accept proof to the opposite and it may simply be that bigger cities tend to conform more to the "post-world-war-II US" setup and this is less true of smaller towns, but then again Edinburgh is a city (though small with only about 450,000 inhabitants) so surely it should conform in the same was as London, Paris, Newcastle...

I must say though that your description is, though complimentary to mine (since it only really describes the center of town), much better written, I'm much better at the delivery of content and the minor corrections than editting :) - *<:@)

Actually, I believe that London is sometimes noted in urban design textbooks as a prototypical example of a city which has grown up out of a bunch of merging villages! Doops 23:47, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

Exactly. Older British cities certainly do NOT conform to the "concentric" model. London does now have a central "business/residential" district - but it did not start out that way! Read Peter Ackroyd's book "London: A Biography".

In Edinburgh's case the "Old Town" started as a residential area, before more or less emptying in the 19th/early 20th C, and now after "gentrification" is now becoming a desirable residential area once again. The "New Town" was originally residential but later became the home of banks and other businesses. Outside this area was industrial; further out still are the modern council and private estates.

Exile

Geography revisited

The following strikes me as point of view — how would people feel about cropping it a bit?

The street layout, typical of the old quarters of many northern European cities, is made especially picturesque in Edinburgh, where the castle perches on top of a rocky crag, the remnants of a dormant volcano, and the main street runs down the crest of a ridge from it.

– Kieran T (talk | contribs) 10:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Subjectivity of Pronunciation

I suspect the pronunciation is just going to keep getting changed, because everyone has different accents. Should it perhaps just be removed? I mean, I have a Scottish accent, but it's fairly angicised (long story), so I pronounce it edin-buh-rah, as do a lot of people here. Some Americans would pronounce it edin-burh, and Renata suggests edden-breh. It's wholly subjective... opinions? -- Taras

The pronunciation guide gives a phonetic guide, and phonemes are deeper language features than accent. A welshman or an austrialian would still use the correct phonemes, although those phonemes sound quite different in their respective accents. The two alternatives you and Renata suggest are roughly equivalent, but the pronunciation guide is important to note that "Edin BurG" is wrong (i.e. the wrong fundamental phonemes), as is "Edin Bo Ro", both of which are common to North Americans (where those are the accepted phonemes for ...burgh placenames). -- Finlay McWalter 13:48, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)
For what it's worth, as a Scot and having lived all over Scotland, the two most common variants I've heard are ED-in-burra (as currently in the article) and ED-in-bruh (compressing burra into one syllable; also my pronunciation). --Air 22:35, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I suggest /bVrV/ for those final two syllables (equiv of "burra")... or /brV/, maybe... My accent isn't particularly strong, tbh. --Finlay 18:49, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

A friend of mine studying linguistics tells me the complete opposite is true, i.e. that phonetic representations are written completely differently according to regional accent. According the phoneme page phonemes vary across languages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zombywuf (talk • contribs)

I'd agree that there are two acceptable pronunciations here; ED-in-bruh and ED-in-burra. I'd change the page to reflect this, but my knowledge of IPA is poor. I'm guessing that it would be "/ɛdɪnˌbərə/"? --Spudtater (talk • contribs) 17:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC) (edited by Blisco to use Template:IPA)

A neat solution - often used in dictionaries - is to put the optional vowel in parentheses. I'd go with /'ɛdɪnb(ə)rə/. I think it's right to enclose the transcription in slashes rather than square brackets, indicating that this is a phonemic (rather than phonetic) transcription, which can apply to any dialect. Blisco 18:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

A Resident of Edinburgh...

What is a resident of Edinburgh referred to as? Ie, Berliner, New Yorker...

Somewhat relevant to the article, but I'm asking mostly because I cannot find what it is.

I don't think there is such a word... Evercat 02:01, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The only variant in common use (by Scottish newspapers) is Edinburgher. Please see Talk:Areas of Edinburgh for discussion. --Air 09:20, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
There's a book called "Edinbuggers vs. Weegies" (where weegies is of course Glaswegians). If you turn it over it says "Weegies vs.

Edinbuggers", so it's kind of on both sides of the age-old feud. --Finlay 18:54, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC):A oerson

A person from Edinburgh is an Edonian. 22nd April 2005

"Edonian"? I've never heard of it. I've always used "Edinburgher" as Air said above (although I always thought it was spelt "Edinburger"). --Colin Angus Mackay 22:17, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Never heard "Edonian" in my twenty years here, either. The Edoni were an obscure Greek (?) tribe in Thrace, though... Shimgray 22:44, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On a connected note, what classes as a resident? Surely someone who is residing there, rather than someone who did reside there? I take umbridge that Sean Connery is mentioned as being a resident when he lives in Spain, and has done for a long time.

He isnt a 'resident', true, but he is an Edinburgher as he was born there - you dont have to continue living in a place to be considered a native. I think Edinburgher is correct. 'Edinburger' sounds like something on the menu at a Grassmarket pub... :: Supergolden 18:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

If you are born, brought-up, and start your adult working life in a city, but then move elsewhere (in Connery's case London, Holywood, Bahamas, Malaga etc) you do not suddenly stop being from that city. Connery is not mentioned as a "resident", he is mentioned as somebody from Edinburgh.

Secondly, I am from the city and I (and people around me during my upbringing) always referred to myself and others as Edinburghers. To me the term is very natural and straighforward, as is the spelling burgh. I have never heard of "Edonian" nor a variant spelling "Edinburger" (that just looks downright weird and foreign).--Mais oui! 18:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


And how does one pronounce "Edinburgher"? /'ɛdɪnb(ə)rəər/?
Carefully -- Derek Ross | Talk 07:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Nicknames et cetera

I'm changing this section to the more conventional "Other names". Additionally, I can find no evidence for "Embro", and only one archaic reference for "Edina". I'm moving "Embra" to the end to reflect its relative importance. --Air 14:49, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

About "Athens of the North", can we also related the current "Duke of Edinburgh" with his Greece origin ? -- bact'
I wouldn't think so. Edinburgh was known as the "Athens of the North" long before he was even born so he has little, if anything, to do with the title. --Colin Angus Mackay 3 July 2005 08:31 (UTC)
Ra Chooky Embra (to cite Malky McCormick's Big Yin cartoons for the Sunday Mail around 1976), otherwise known as Phil the Greek, is from my understanding Danish in origin. The Athens of the North has more to do with the classics of the Enlightenment, and perhaps "Edinburgh's disgrace". Personally, I think of Piraeus as the Leith of the South. --dave souza 4 July 2005 10:15 (UTC)

And in Tom Stoppard's Jumpers, a character describes Edinburgh as the Reykjavík of the south... Doops | talk 5 July 2005 01:13 (UTC)

I think the Latin for Edinburgh is actually "Edina"; "Edinensis" sounds like the adjectival form, meaning "of Edinburgh", so would indeed appear frequently on public buildings (eg. "the city/citizens of Edinburgh"). Could anyone confirm this? I haven't got time to look it up just at present. Blisco 08:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Edinensis definitely means Edinburgian rather than Edinburgh. Edina has been used as a Latin name for Edinburgh since at least the time of Mary, Queen of Scots. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Image request (not strictly related)

I've made a image request of a plaque in this city, hopefully a resident of Edinburgh or someone passing through will be able to fulfill it:

A close up and wide shot of the plaque at London Street 15 in Edinburgh (east coast of Scotland) which should read: Íslenski þjóðsöngurinn, Ó, guð vors lands, lagið og hluti ljóðsins, var saminn í þessu húsi árið 1874 af Sveinbirni Sveinbjörnssyni og Matthíasi Jochumssyni.. For use at Lofsöngur and Lofsöngur.

--Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 03:26, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)

  • Have taken some snaps - see here. Hope this helps! Qwghlm 21:27, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

Other names

Removed the line "In French, Edinburgh is known as Edimbourg". This is true, but I see no reason why it should be included unless we are also willing to include the Spanish "Edimburgo" and heaven knows how many others.

Blogs as external links

I'm lothe to remove external links unless they are highly inappropriate, however I'm unsure of this one. An external link was added today that points to a blogger site that, as far as I can tell, is being used to reproduce news about Edinburgh. Should it stay or should it go? My instinct says that it is inappropriate in the context of an online encyclopedia. --Colin Angus Mackay

Looks ad-driven, to me... I'll give the rest of the links a prune as well. Some of them are only marginally useful (the "hotels" one) and effectively count as endorsing a commercial site... Shimgray 13:00, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. Good to know that my instinct was correct. --Colin Angus Mackay 22:03, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Tourist influx

Could someone provide details on the tourist numbers to Edinburgh. Is the value that the population of Edinburgh increases by 1.5 to 2 million during the festival correct? Is there really upto 2.5 million people in Edinburgh all at once? --Colin Angus Mackay 14:34, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

The number I always heard over the last ten years or so was "doubling in size" - ie, to a million people. It is possible that both figures are accurate, but one is misreported; if the city peaks at a half-million visitors, then the total influx of visitors across the entire period might very well be three or four times that. No sources, though. Shimgray 20:39, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
A google search reveals a large number of websites reciting the 'fact' that the population doubles in size during the festival. It's four years since I lived in Edinburgh but from my memories of that time the population doubling during the festival seems like a realistic estimate. The BBC states that 1,251,997 tickets were sold during the 2004 Fringe Festival—granted there are other festivals going on at the same time, but even if no locals bought tickets to fringe events and every tourist only bought one ticket that is still a long way short of 2 million visitors. JeremyA 22:35, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Okay - I'll update the article to correct the information. --Colin Angus Mackay 13:16, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

According to the bbc [1] "1.134 million foreign tourists visited the city in 2005 - up 194,000 on 2004." This falls someway short of the 13 million quoted in the article. --dash9000 16:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Edinburgh becoming a capital

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica (see [2]) Edinburgh became the capital in 1437. Of the sources that I found stating 1492 they were obvious derivations from Wikipedia (i.e. sentences were copied verbatim). Can anyone confirm the actual date? --Colin Angus Mackay 21:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This looks like a case of "what do you mean by Capital?" From my trusty copy of The Lion in the North, John Prebble, Penguin Books 1973, James I was murdered on 20 February 1437, his queen took her son "to the safety of Edinburgh castle, and within five weeks of his father's murder James II was crowned and anointed in the Abbey church of Holyrood. He was six years of age.... The ceremony at Holyrood broke the hallowed tradition of a coronation at Scone". At that time the king seems to have moved from castle to castle: James III was imprisoned in Edinburgh castle for a while. Around 1488 James IV became king, and later "By his residence in the palace he built next to the Abbey walls at Holyrood, Edinburgh became the principal burgh, the capital of the kingdom." So from that, Edinburgh took over from Scone as the place of coronation in 1437, and became established as royal residence and capital around 1492. --dave souza 4 July 2005 10:15 (UTC)

merging in Areas of Edinburgh

I see no reason why this should be a separate article, except as an excuse to stick the navigation template, which some people hate, on. I was hoping someone else would merge them if I stuck the merge templates on, but this hasn't happened. --MarSch 08:53, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

There seems to be something of an antipattern where progressively more stuff ends up being put in the main article for a city. Our Edinburgh article is already quite large, so I don't favour the merge. I'd rather we improved the areas of edinburgh article, perhaps doing:
  • dump the box and just have the links as regular text
  • break them up in to some geographical structure (alphabetical order is really meaningless)
  • add a map. I should be able to produce something like [3], only hopefully with more detail
-- Finlay McWalter | Talk 09:28, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Gordon Brown

Gordon Brown, the current chancellor of the exchequer, was Rector of Edinburgh University and Chairman of the University Court between 1972 and 1975. From 1976 to 1980, Mr Brown lectured at Edinburgh University. Is this worth mentioning?

Under Edinburgh University, yes. Here, not really; "politicians who have worked in Edinburgh" is not a small set. Shimgray 18:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Images

I resized one image and removed Image:Edinburgh And The Firth Of Forth.jpg to try and improve the page format. The image isn't bad, but the page is not large enough to support so many images. If somebody can find a place to put it that keeps the article flow, then feel free to add it back in. --GraemeL (talk) 16:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Major cull of external links

Using WP:EL as a basis I have made a major cull of this articles external links. There was a large number of links to individual tourist sites (theatres, museums, ...), plus other minor interest sites. In cutting down to two main links (official tourist info and the council website) along with mapping and wikitravel I think we are a lot more focussed and useful. The tourist info site points to the sites previously listed here. Any comments? Thanks/wangi 12:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Seems reasonable.--Mais oui! 13:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Parliament picture

Current photo
Current photo

Guys, are you really sure you want to keep the underexposed photo? In its current state, I'm pretty sure it won't achieve feature status - no offence to the photographer. It's clear he was working in difficult lighting conditions, and may not have had a tripod or even control over exposure. - Samsara contrib talk 06:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Photo added by Samsara
Photo added by Samsara
Granted, It's not the best... but at least it's fairly natural colours. I'd say it's pretty well spot on exposure wise, except for the customary over exposure in the sky... And the other is over exposed on the white areas of the building. The one you put in its place is way over saturated.
I'll have a look through my photos at http://www.pbase.com/wangi/parliament (and off line) to see if i've anything better. Maybe http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/34530799? Thanks/wangi 09:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow. Your photos are really good. I hope everyone realises that I was simply manipulating the previous photo, so if you think it's oversat, I can turn that down. I did in fact produce a few versions of it, some of which had the green channel reduced (which seems to be the main problem when you raise brightness and contrast). - Samsara contrib talk 13:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Yep, I agree with the one you suggested. I'd also second http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/41834156 for inclusion in Scottish Parliament if you're interested. - 86.132.4.130 01:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Scottish Parliament, from Salisbury Crags
Scottish Parliament, from Salisbury Crags
Scottish Parliament, window detail
Scottish Parliament, window detail
Will do. Thanks/wangi 13:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Schools

I think the lists of schools could be moved out to a List of schools in Edinburgh article. With it in here its just a massive list of redlinks filling up the bottom of the page. Any thoughts? ::Supergolden:: 17:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes I'd agree with this, the list is far too long for this page (the see also section was a bit long before it was added). The list of schools is also on this page: List_of_schools_in_the_United_Kingdom#City_of_Edinburgh, so you could just add a link to there. But that article is already very long, so it probably needs splitting up anyway. Vclaw 18:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Good. I made a new page anyway - it seems to duplicate the part of the overall List of schools (and what a horrible 'article' that is). I also wrote a short section on Education which replaces both the list of schools and the list of universities/colleges. Perhaps some of the other listy sections at the bottom of the article could be replaced in this way? ::Supergolden:: 12:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Transport

I noticed that the Glasgow article had information about the transport in the city, wouldn't it be an idea for the Edinburgh article to have the same? As I live in the city I'll be able to quite a bit of info. Shaun Mcdonald 2006-03-14

Sounds good, as long as its not just a list of bus routes or something... Yeah, I like the Glasgow transport section, something like that would be good here. Go for it Shaun. ::Supergolden:: 18:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I started a Transport in Edinburgh article but made a bit of a mess of it, so just left it. It's here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_Edinburgh Globaltraveller 09:24, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Images

I don't want to upset anyone, and I don't mean any disrespect at all to the people that took them, but is there any chance that this page could have better images on it - that are maybe slightly brighter and more inspiring. When you look at the pages for the likes of Auckland or Melbourne, they are stunning. I know the article isn't meant to be a tourist advert, but there are loads of good images of Edinburgh on Commons. Apologies again Globaltraveller 20:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No need to apologise for pointing out how an article can be improved. Perhaps you could provide some links to the commons images you think would be an improvement over the existing ones in the article. If you link them with [[:Image:Image name.jpg]] (With a colon at the start) they will be inserted as hyperlinks, rather than clogging the talk page up with more images. --GraemeL (talk) 20:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Well there are some fairly good/bright ones that just add a bit of colour. The street scene image in the article, the view across to the Old Town, and the view of Edinburgh Waverley just seem a bit too dark. Is it possible for some of the images to be made a bit bigger, without compromising the layout of the article?

Globaltraveller 19:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


Brass cobbles

There has recently been a sentence added about the brass cobbles in the Royal Mile, with reference to their marking out the position of the old city wall. I know this is true of some of them (certainly for the Netherbow Port), but I always believed that at least some of them, around the site of the Tolbooth, marked gallows points. Is this true? If so, the article should mention that the cobbles have multiple significances. As an aside, but as evidence of the theory at least having some likelihood, I do know for sure that the cobbles on Braid Road had the gallows-marking meaning. Kierant 23:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The brass cobbles in Paliament Square (outside St. Giles) mark out the position of old buildings, not the wall. There is a board opposite St Giles which explains the details, which I don't know off the top of my head. The ones by the World's End are the city walls. I'm not sure about the ones by the Tolbooth, but you're right, they do have different meanings. ::Supergolden:: 08:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Financial markets in Edinburgh and Leeds, which is bigger?

There appears to be a discrepancy between this article, which states ' Edinburgh is the second largest financial centre in the United Kingdom after the City of London', and the Wikipedia article on Leeds, which states 'Leeds has … the largest media, financial and legal sectors outside London'. Thus, which city can rightfully claim to have the second largest financial sector in the United Kingdom after the City of London? I haven’t been able to confirm this either way. --Nicholas 14:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, Edinburgh would seem more likely - Leeds has a GDP of 25,600 Euro/capita, whilst Edinburgh's 35,000 [4], and Edinburgh's always had a large financial sector... Shimgray | talk | 16:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


Infirmary

I didn't want to just dive in to change this without first checking with regular editors of Edinburgh pages, but it seems odd: the Edinburgh article—and the separate list of hospitals—refer to the non-existent (and long-winded) page title, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh at Little France. However, there is already a page, Edinburgh Royal Infirmary. It is out of date, but I don't understand why it is not the one linked to; it only needs a sentence to update it. If nobody objects, I'll update it and change the links. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 09:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Go for it Kieran, I have wondered the same thing myself.... ::Supergolden:: 11:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Researched and done. The hardest part was coming up with a working external link for the place, since the NHS sites are in a bit of a state of flux. I also wonder if it would be better, pedantically, to rename the page. It's currently Edinburgh Royal Infirmary with a redirect in operation from Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. Since I believe the latter is the legal name (with or without the "Little France" bit!), it's somewhat backwards to have that one being the redirector. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 12:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Good work on updating it, it's now a much better article. I'd say keep the article at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary. Even if it isn't the official / legal name it is by far the most commonly used name - see for example usage by The Scotsman [5]. Vclaw 12:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Place-name meaning

I have found a more reliable source for place-name meaning of Edinburgh. Maybe this should be mentioned?? --Sunfazer | Talk 12:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The whole placename section could use some references. This Eada's Hill theory is new to me: why do you think it is more reliable? Assuming you can justify it, wouldn't it make more sense if it were mentioned in the same context as the Edwin's Fort theory (i.e. possible Anglo-Saxon names rather than Brythonic).--Philbarker 19:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent Edits and article Length

I've recently edited a few sections, trying to cut down on some areas that seem to be taking up a lot of space - like the Famous residents section. I've added a rough section on Transport -linking to another article, as this has been missing up until now. The thing is there is still lots that could (and probably should) go into this article - a section on culture maybe (including information about all the Festivals etc) and a section on Landmarks/Tourist attractions, but the article seems to me to be too long as it currently is, without these other quite crucial missing sections. Which brings me to the question is there really a need to list all the Foreign Consulates in Edinburgh on the main article? (I notice other cities don't do this), or famous residents - as this only seems to take up valuable space? Am I being paranoid? Thoughts....anyone? Globaltraveller 18:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I would tend to agree - I can't really see the value of the consulates. Residents is interesting enough though. Funny you should mention a culture section - I started one on my user page, see User: Supergolden/Edinburgh. Its very rough but have a look - if you think its up to being pasted into the article I will do so. My aim was to replace the list sections which are useless at present. ::Supergolden:: 11:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I've put the foreign consulates in another article, with a link under See Also. I don't think there was much point in having them on the main article. I definitely think the culture/tourist sections should be posted into the article, they will get rid of the lists at the bottom of the page. Go for it! Globaltraveller 16:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote of confidence Global. I put in the Culture section with some tweaks - could use expansion. Tourism section is still a bit sketchy i think, I will try to work on this area. But don't let me stop anyone else from having a go! ::Supergolden:: 14:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)