Talk:Hilton Hotels

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hilton Hotels article.
Article policies
This article is part of WikiProject Hotels, a WikiProject related to hotels.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Hilton Paris

I'm proposing to merge Hilton Paris page into this one since that hotel is of little independent notability. Pascal.Tesson 14:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Support merge proposal and the hotel is known as Hotel Hilton Paris [1] and true lacks independent notability.--John Lake 14:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] my reversions

1) anti semitism charge - this is strictily wiki npov, facts are to be reported, only objections can be relevance and sourcing, on relevance, certainly that someone portrayed as a humanitarian leader was antisemitic is worth noting 2) reads like advertising, for instance the first line, "flagship" brand is advetising, the sentance about grwoing to americas 1 st coast to coast chain is simply poor english, ungrammatical and poorly written 3) "leading hotels" say who; souirce this with indpendnt source and i will gladly accept it

  • Please sign your posts as suggested in the guidelines. Material about an individual belongs in that persons article. It does not need to be repeated in every article the person might have been involved with. My changes actually reduced the advertising tone of the article. Flagship is not advertising, it is a well accepted term to describe the leading brand for a company. Even if you took it as advertising, how would it affect the article? Its not like we are comparing this brand to another company brand. It only applies to the other Hilton brands. If there is a problem with leading hotels, why not just request a citation with {{fact}} rather then deleting what might be correct information? Vegaswikian 00:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Ummm...speaking of "poor English, ungrammatical (not a word), and poorly written" - you should proof-read your own work, then sign it. Thedjb 02:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hilton York

Just a quick message:

I have added Hilton Hotel York, England to the list of hotels in the UK.

I can confirm that it exists; I am currenly sat in the foyer ;-). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.130.146.200 (talk) 21:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Notable hotels

Should we keep this section? Right now it appears to be a place to try and list all of the hotels owned by the chain. If the individual property is not notable enough to merit an article, with some exceptions, why should it be included here? Do these entries really belong in a separate list if there is a need to list every hotel? Vegaswikian 22:02, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

  • who says they are notable ? is this the judgement of a group of city planners or architects , or marketing spin by hilton ? are there objective criteria for this ? untill this is answered with facts, it seems to be a biased statement, not supported by facts that is why I have changed it to "hotels claimed to be notable" If you have some facts or citations to support the more impressive claim "notable hotels" please post.Cinnamon colbert 14:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Look at how the headings are on any other article for something notable. This is an encyclopedia and it is based on fact and not allegations. Notable is acceptable, search on 'notable alumni' for one very specific case. So, I'll be restoring the old heading. Please don't use terminology that is un encyclopedic in a heading. As I said in my edit notes, if someone wants to create a list for all of their hotels, feel free to do that. Then we might be able to remove the notable list here and only include hotels that are mentioned specifically in the text. You may also wish to read WP:N. Vegaswikian 19:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
      • it is you that is being un encyclopediac. simply provide a source for the term notable. in the absence of that source, notable should be removed.Cinnamon colbert 22:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It is true that there are many wiki articles that use the term "notable". However, most of these don't seem to serve as advertising for a for profit company. I do not think it the job of wikipedia to provide advertising for hilton, whihc, in the absence of a source, is all notable does. E.g., there is an article, notable bostonians - but I don't think that this directly serves a particular for profit group, whereas "notable hotels" does.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hilton hotel.png

Image:Hilton hotel.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 22:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bangkok Hilton

I removed the section on Bangkok Hilton. I see no reason why this is relevant to the Hilton chain as it was a nickname of a fictional prison and a dirivative of "Hanoi Hilton". Perhaps a "Hilton Hotels in Popular Culture" Section should be added. --Wareagle3890 03:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

That's good idea to add the section Hilton Hotels in Pupular culture, I coulnd't find the reason why Bangkok Hilton is relevant. Daniel 5127 01:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of images

I think we have editors adding an image of any hotel they find in the article. Personally I don't see the need for more then one or two. So if someone wants to replace an existing image fine. I don't know that adding a gallery for images would improve the article so I'm not suggesting that as an alternative. Vegaswikian 19:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

  • I think the number of images really brings the quality of the article down. I don't find many of them to be very notable and some of the photos are not particularly well-shot. I think we either need a gallery with perhaps one or two prominent Hilton's listed on the page (ie Beverly) or a major cleanup of the article as is.Thedjb 00:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I think a Gallery or a Table-Gallery will be good , we can add much more images too and it looks good . see City and town halls . Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 22:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hilton-Colombo.jpg

Image:Hilton-Colombo.jpg 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 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 08:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inconsistency with room number of John and Yoko Ono

In the page that comes up when searching 'Hilton Hotels', in the last paragraph realting to John Lenon and Yoko Ono's stay at the Hilton Hotel in Amsterdam, the article states that they stayed in room 902.

However when viewing the same fact on the page 'Bed-in for peace' it states that they statey in room 702.

I do not know which is the correct room, but there definitely is an inconsisteny.

Regards, Nicky —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.56.138.90 (talk) 10:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)