Talk:London/City of London

The Tower of London
User:(WT-en) Dpaajones moved The Tower of London out of this article in March 2007 beacuse it is just on the outside edge of the official council area. On Wikivoyage the traveller comes first, so because most people would visit it from the City, would consider it part of the City and we don't have any proper East London articles yet, I propose to reinstate it in a few weeks time. -- (WT-en) DanielC 14:47, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Hello - here to help
Hi all,

We're the Visitor Development team at the City of London Corporation, and wanted to help out with this page if that's OK. Just to declare an interest: we'd like to provide some useful information, but many of the materials we have obviously carry the City Corporation's logo, etc. If this is a problem, please do let us know.

In the future we'd like to add maps and pictures - we have quite a bit of content designed to help visitors with their trip. For now, however, we'll just make a few edits to the text - the existing version as of 06/02 is very comprehensive and has lots of good information, so we'll simply be correcting a couple of things if they're not quite right (for instance, the City's population is a little higher than the 8000 the article currently states) along with a general proofreading.

Wherever possible we'll provide links and evidence for our edits, though in many cases we might not be able to. For instance, the paragraph that currently contains "It is hard to believe how dead the area is on the weekend and it can barely be stressed enough that if you are in The City on a weekend, it will seem like the movie 28 Days Later" is certainly evocative but also not quite accurate. We don't have footfall stats to share, but we do know that the City has a few busy areas on a weekend from our own experiences! (Experiences in the City, that is: sadly none of us has ever been in a real-life Rage-addled zombie-fest.)

Please let us know if there's anything else we could do to help, if you have an idea for extra content for the article that we could provide, or if you feel our edits aren't reasonable. We're a small team but we'll monitor the Discussion page as often as we can.

Many thanks,

The Visitor Development team


 * It's great to hear that you are interested in improving the article. Welcome, tourism professionals might have some good advice on how to go about it. The main thing to consider is that all your contributions will automatically be licensed under our copyleft, which frees anyone to create derivative works under the same license, while providing attribution. So additions that have your logo on them (which is something we try to avoid), may be edited to remove the logo. Regarding zombie references, be sure to replace anything contentious with prose that is equally lively. You could even keep the original language, but transition to explain while that is the stereotype, there are some areas that... --Peter Talk 16:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Great - thanks Peter. Useful information, and thanks for the advice regarding logos and media. We'll keep that in mind - it might be better then if we just link to some content rather than host it here, if that's acceptable.
 * Visit the City


 * Since you are the official Visitor Development team at the City of London Corporation, it is quite appropriate for there to be a link to your site at the beginning of the article. It's http://www.visitthecity.co.uk/, isn't it? If so, it's already linked. I would love for you to add more content, but more than one link to your site would normally not be within the guidelines of our external links policy. However, I love your enthusiasm for improving the article, so I would love for you to work with us on ways to do that within our guidelines. What specific things are you thinking of linking to? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Ikan, Yep - that's our site, but you'll notice it's a redirect to the Corporation website. We've added a second link to our pages at the end of the Tourist Information Centre paragraph, but this was to provide both versions (the re-direct and the standard URL). Not sure if this has added clarity or confused the issue, and it might need to be taken down anyway if it's breach of your guidelines (apologies, didn't notice that one). Regarding things we'd link to, we're developing some visitor-friendly maps which I thought would be useful - printable and free. It might be that a different site - one of the many London bloggers perhaps - links to our pages, and we could link to that. (That's possibly unwieldy, but it wouldn't breach your guidelines.) Other things which could feature are materials like downloadable walking tour maps and guides, lists of attractions, hotels, shops, and a programme of events. We've just put a catch-all link with 'The City Corporation's 'Visiting the City' pages also contains information for visitors, including lists of attractions, events, and walking tours' at the moment to cover this, but I think that can be improved. Essentially, we've got a good range of materials that we use in the City Information Centre, so can try to help with pretty much anything, but we want to use it to support what other people recommend and write rather than controlling the content too much - that's obviously not what Wikivoyage is for.
 * Once again, thanks for your help.
 * Stuart from the Visitor Development Team.


 * Thanks a lot, Stuart. I really would like to work with you on these things. There are some issues, though. Under our external links policy, off-site maps cannot be directly linked, but I would think it would be fine to mention in a listing of the Tourism Information Centre that, among other things, you provide free maps. The lists of attractions sound very useful, and can help us in the following way: If some attractions are not yet listed on our City of London page or the listings could use more information, please feel free to include some of the content from your lists here. Events are great to list, too. The walking tours - are these self-guided? If so, they might (or possibly might not) be good as separate itinerary pages. Please have a look at Itineraries for some guidelines on what is and is not a good type of itinerary to list on this site. The key point is: "An itinerary article should be a guide for traveling along a specific, recognized route and not merely a suggested sightseeing schedule." If any of these walking tours turn out to be good for itineraries, I would think it would be fine to link the relevant sub-site from "Visiting the City" once in the article and mention that the Wikivoyage article includes material from (but does not plagiarize from) your site. If they are "merely suggested sightseeing schedule[s]," they could be included in this article, rather than an additional article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Map oddity
At least with my main browser, current Firefox on Ubuntu Linux, I see a large blank square at London/City_of_London with a little tag telling me to click for a full-size map. Clicking works and gives me essentially the same map I get if I click on the map icon at the top of the article. What is up with that?

I can test with other browsers if needed, but I suspect the problem is the page not my browser, so I am asking first. Pashley (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The map does appear for me, though it does sometimes take a second or two longer to load than the rest of the page. You could try a hard refresh of the page in your browser perhaps? --Nick talk 00:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Serviced apartment listing
Please have a look at this edit. I was going to revert it on the basis that their office is in Lancashire, but I'm not so sure; does this statement of purpose make them different from or similar to AirBnB, which obviously cannot be listed here? The basic problem is that no exact street address is given, whereas one should be, following this site's Manual of style. So what do you think; does the new listing need to be removed or not? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Listings in the wrong district?
Based on the map at London and the mapshape here, it looks like many of the listings in this article should be in other districts, especially London/Holborn-Clerkenwell. Am I mistaken? Or should we start moving those listings? —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're not wrong, and some of them also belong in London/East End. Would need to confirm on the map, but I would say everything outside the mapshape and east of the Northern line (the black one) is in Shoreditch or Whitechapel, ergo East End, whereas markers west of the Northern line outside the shape are in Clerkenwell.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll double-check the maps in the London article and start moving the listings. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)