Talk:Scheveningen

Merge tag
I don't see why Scheveningen can't be a seperate article. Scheveningen is a district within The Hague. There a more articles where districts have seperates articles within the city. Nothing unusual about that. Having a seperate article for Scheveningen does justice to the fact that Scheveningen is a seperate tourist destination and would also keep the The Hague article better readable. The two destinations also have a completely different character. By the way, I am a resident of The Hague. --(WT-en) Whatsinaname 22:13, 25 August 2011 (EDT)


 * I have no objections to a separate article. It's indeed a major tourist destination, which makes detailed information on places to stay and eat desirable. The Hague could be expanded, but it's a fairly large city with plenty of information to be included, apart from the Scheveningen listings. Integrating the Scheveningen article, which still room to grow too, would probably overcrowd the The Hague article, at least in time. Besides, Scheveningen is very very well known as a separate destination in the Netherlands. Frankly, I'm guessing that half the people in the Netherlands might not even know that it's just a district of The Hague. (WT-en) Justme 18:50, 26 August 2011 (EDT)


 * Obviously Scheveningen warrants an article of its own. The problem is where the boundary lies, and whether The Hague could or would have to be districtified, as then Scheveningen would be a district of The Hague. We have tried discussing possible districts for The Hague here, but frankly, that has not been a success. The Hague is probably just too small to need districtification, and having a city with just 2 districts is odd. So this current situation seems the best, at least for now. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:16, 26 August 2011 (EDT)


 * Odd in terms of Wikivoyage-structures perhaps. Not at all odd in terms of traveller information though. For example, there's a bunch of separate tourist information/branding materials for Scheveningen, where those do not exist for the other districts of The Hague. Since the traveller comes first, I'm quite okay with odd. Both options are better than this huge template above an article. :-) (WT-en) Justme 19:26, 26 August 2011 (EDT)


 * I meant just having The Hague/Centre and The Hague/Scheveningen would be odd. I'm fine with having a stand-alone Scheveningen article, at least until we've resolved if/how The Hague would need districts. I have removed the merge tag. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:40, 26 August 2011 (EDT)


 * Well done, Globe-trotter. Actually, the municipality of The Hague could be divided into three historical areas: 1. The Hague; 2. Scheveningen and 3. Loosduinen. I think no one will start a separate article about Loosduinen, because it is of no interest to the traveler. Even within the article about The Hague you won’t find much information about Loosduinen.  Maybe it is odd for Wikivoyage, but I think it is the best solution to have one main article about The Hague, excluding Scheveningen, and one district article about Scheveningen. And then the district article about Scheveningen will be the only one district article within The Hague, because The Hague doesn't have other districts that deserve a seperate article.