Talk:Berlin/South

''This page is for discussing the content of the corresponding article or guide. For more about using talk pages, check out Using talk pages.''

Comments
The image for Köpenick Palace does not look right - it looks like it was likely built by the same architect, or was built to strongly resemble Schloss Köpenick - but as you can see the Palace itself is visible in the top graphic, and is right on the river - the roof is also visible, and there are marked if subtle differences. The image of the palace at Wikipedia gives a much closer view of it, and I'm going to simply use the same image from Wiki Commons to this end. L. Challenger (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Should this district be broken up into constituent parts?
If you ask me out of all the current Berlin districts, this is the most hodgepodge one. And it would imho not be all that difficult to break it up into more self-contained and immediately obvious units. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:39, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * This travel district spans 45km/28 miles from east to west and huddles together districts with a completely different character and historical development. I agree it should be broken up, at best into the three units (1) Southwest: Steglitz Zehlendorf, (2) South: Tempelhof-Neukölln, and (3) Southeast: Treptow-Köpenick according to the following district map. --Rio65trio (talk) 23:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * what do you say? Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:05, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * agree with the three units split suggested above. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Anybody else?, , , , , , ,  you seem to either be German or have previously participated in district discussion at Talk:Berlin, what do you think? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:31, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Berlin is the single destination I visit most often, I feel capable of contributing too. The sheer quantity of important sights alone justifies this action. I'm puzzled to find no mention whatsoever to Gropiusstadt. Truly lovely architecture. Ibaman (talk) 22:17, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not that familiar with this part of Berlin, though my girlfriend did stay in Neukölln, so I saw the neighborhood briefly. I'll support whatever is decided by consensus. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely sure it is necessary to split it up - it doesn't seem we would have enough listings in each section to justify three separate districts. And I like it that Berlin has a manageable number of districts (for both reading and maintaining). However, if there are strong reasons for doing the split, I won't stand in the way - but it would be great if any empty section resulting from the splitting could be filled as soon as possible, since empty sections leave a bad impression on the traveler. Xsobev (talk) 17:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * "It doesn't seem we would have enough listings in each section." --> That's just because no one filled them up already. There are hundreds of possible points of interest in each section. I can help with Treptow-Köpenick where I grew up and Steglitz which I know as well. Neukölln is a trendy neighbourhood and should be no problem either. But in its current state this travel district is ridiculously large. --Rio65trio (talk) 19:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

It just seems to me that this district consists of several disparate parts with little in common, as was pointed out in an earlier district discussion. I think now there are so many listings that people might refrain from adding otherwise worthy items. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If rearranging this district into 2 or 3 smaller ones causes people to add more points of interest, then it is worth splitting. I just think that district pages that end up being half empty for a long time leave a bad impression on the traveler (Montreal is an example for that). Adding new points of interest before splitting is a great suggestion to avoid that. Xsobev (talk) 14:20, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I think even split up they wouldn't be empty. If anything the map is a bit overloaded as is. And it's literally all the South of Berlin, with gentrifying neighborhoods thrown in together with rather rural and rather run down parts; east thrown together with west. Proletarian with CDU-voting (nobody in Berlin votes CDU and would even remotely be considered proletarian)... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Here is an overview of what would be empty (and therefore would benefit from adding listings) after the proposed split in three districts: Please don't take this as criticism, but I think the list might be helpful to fill the gaps. Unfortunately, I don't know these areas well enough to make any useful additions (otherwise I would have done so already). So if there is anyone who does, any additions would be greatly appreciated. Xsobev (talk) 16:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * See: no listing for Neukölln in Tempelhof/Neukölln
 * Do: only one listing in Steglitz/Zehlendorf
 * Buy: no listings in Treptow/Köpenick
 * Drink: no listings in Steglitz/Zehlendorf
 * Sleep: no listings in Treptow/Köpenick
 * Connect: no listing at all
 * Thanks for pointing this out. Is "connect" even needed at all in district articles, though? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:11, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Are we any closer to consensus?
,, , , , , , given that a bunch of listings have been added, do you want to weigh in once more? I would like this resolved one way or the other before Berlin is featured on the main page. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't look at me, as I'm still unfamiliar with this part of Berlin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:58, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * True enough, but maybe the number of listings and their position on the map can give a slight inclination whether one side or the other is on the completely wrong track? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm planning to contribute further listings, but am busy with other things until mid-January.--Rio65trio (talk) 21:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for adding all the extra information, especially to Rio65trio, but also to everyone else. I think it's getting close to going ahead with the split. Maybe we'll wait until around mid-January and see if Rio65trio or anyone else had the time to add more. Here is an updated list of what is still missing/has only one listing: If "Connect" is needed I don't know, but it's mentioned here: District_article_template. Thanks, Xsobev (talk) 11:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * See: no listing for Neukölln in Tempelhof/Neukölln
 * Do: only one listing in Steglitz/Zehlendorf
 * Drink: only one listing in Steglitz/Zehlendorf
 * Sleep: only one listing in Treptow/Köpenick
 * Connect: no listing at all

Berlin/South
So I pointed out some time ago at Talk:Berlin/South that the district is huge and contains vastly different areas and suggested it be broken up into two or three separate districts. Per Talk:Berlin there was even some queasiness back when the district was created. A counter-argument brought forth at the time was the lack of listings in some part of the district. However, recent edits have added a lot of them. Would you please have a look and weigh in whether we should or should not subdivide the district? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:15, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Berlin/South - proposal to go ahead
So I have some time ago proposed to subdivide the gargantuan (at the very least by area) district article that is Berlin/South. I created by mostly copy-paste in my user space three sub-articles that I think make sense geographically and from their density of attractions. They have some room for improvement still, but I would not be too concerned if they went live today with minor changes. Those are User:Hobbitschuster/Berlin/Treptow-Köpenick, User:Hobbitschuster/Berlin/Central-South (the name may be changed later if it is too generic) and User:Hobbitschuster/Berlin/Steglitz-Zehlendorf. I think we can quite easily expand some things that are currently dealt with in one or two words by making them listings and so on. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:13, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Since no-one has anything to say, you might as well go ahead and move them to mainspace, and while you're at it upgrade the article status from outline. They are all high usables and with the addition of a few more sleep listings in each can easily be classed as guides. Nice work ;) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:46, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it was User:Xsobev who had the strongest doubts when I proposed the subdivision. I'd like to hear their input. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no familiarity with Berlin, but the proposed district articles look fine to me. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * They're certainly filled out with adequate content. Now you've done all the work and they're looking good, I'd be very surprised if anybody objected to their move to main space. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Apologies for not getting back to you earlier. There have been a lot of improvements in the past in Berlin/South and I no longer have any objections to the proposed subdivisions. The new district pages look great. Thanks everyone who contributed to this and I'm glad that this "sub-districtification" worked out so well.
 * A completely separate concern is the visual clutter created by using the listings template in the "Get in" sections (a separate issue raised in the pub earlier), which has already been addressed by this edit by User:Mx. Granger. Xsobev (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I have moved the articles from userspace top main space. Some issues and necessary fixes remain Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)