Talk:Lower Engadine
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The contents of the Lower Engadine page were merged into Engadin on 16 March 2022 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Most of this would belong on WikiTravel Engadine, which needs it. Wikipedia is not a travel guide--triwbe (talk) 07:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think you removed too much content without much explanation. The main problem with some of the removed text is more the way it's written, than the content itself. -- User:Docu
OK, to be more specific; what I removed appeared to be promotional, non-neutral, non-notable and self researched all prohibited on Wikipedia articles. Where as Wikitravel is made for exactly this type of information and would be a much better place to put it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a tavel guide where it specifically says:
Travel guides. An article on Paris should mention landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre, but not the telephone number or street address of your favorite hotel or the price of a café au lait on the Champs-Élysées. Wikipedia is not a place to re-create content more suited to entries in hotel guides, culinary guides, travelogues, and the like. Notable locations may meet inclusion criteria, but Wikipedia does not list every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel, venue, etc. Such details may be welcome at Wikitravel, however.
The article has a place on Wikipedia, but it must remain within the guidlines. --triwbe (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The article has almost no readers [1] but has some relevant informations. I propose to include them in Engadin (which has a Lower Engadine section) and redirect on it. I don't see any reasons to have two articles for the same valley. Zacharie Grossen (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)