Eisspeedway

Talk:Motel: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Oknazevad (talk | contribs)
2001:5c0:1000:a::ad7 (talk)
Line 77: Line 77:
This page was already tagged as {{globalise}} once before as it is a US-centric mess. Someone removed the tag, not sure why, but I'm afraid I shall have to reinstate it given the latest attempts to turn this back into an article about the United States and remove English spelling instead of [[WP:RETAIN]]ing what was there. [[User:K7L|K7L]] ([[User talk:K7L|talk]]) 16:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
This page was already tagged as {{globalise}} once before as it is a US-centric mess. Someone removed the tag, not sure why, but I'm afraid I shall have to reinstate it given the latest attempts to turn this back into an article about the United States and remove English spelling instead of [[WP:RETAIN]]ing what was there. [[User:K7L|K7L]] ([[User talk:K7L|talk]]) 16:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
:"When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change." Quoting from [[WP:RETAIN]]. The article was clearly established in US English (a perfectly acceptable spelling variety) for years before it was changed. A call to expand international coverage is NOT is any way, shape or form a call to change the variety of English used. So your edits actually disrespect [[WP:RETAIN]] and the entire [[WP:ENGVAR]] guideline and are wrong. Period. As for the international coverage, [[Motel#International versions|the international versions section]], added after the previous tagging as part of a major expansion satisfied the need for the tag. Is the article a bit US-first? Yes, but as motels originated in the US, that is to be expected. It is clear, by your calling it "English spelling", there by denigrating US spelling, that you need to check [[WP:ENGVAR]] and understand it much better. [[User:Oknazevad|oknazevad]] ([[User talk:Oknazevad|talk]]) 16:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
:"When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change." Quoting from [[WP:RETAIN]]. The article was clearly established in US English (a perfectly acceptable spelling variety) for years before it was changed. A call to expand international coverage is NOT is any way, shape or form a call to change the variety of English used. So your edits actually disrespect [[WP:RETAIN]] and the entire [[WP:ENGVAR]] guideline and are wrong. Period. As for the international coverage, [[Motel#International versions|the international versions section]], added after the previous tagging as part of a major expansion satisfied the need for the tag. Is the article a bit US-first? Yes, but as motels originated in the US, that is to be expected. It is clear, by your calling it "English spelling", there by denigrating US spelling, that you need to check [[WP:ENGVAR]] and understand it much better. [[User:Oknazevad|oknazevad]] ([[User talk:Oknazevad|talk]]) 16:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
::I looked at this page and its history. It's a mess. Way too much detail about individual US motels that likely aren't even particularly notable. The rewrite only made this worse. Changing the spelling isn't going to fix that, the useless trivia needs to be removed and the page cleaned up. No one cares that some individual lodging in Baton Rouge that used to be good in 1939 is now a dump. [[Special:Contributions/2001:5C0:1000:A:0:0:0:AD7|2001:5C0:1000:A:0:0:0:AD7]] ([[User talk:2001:5C0:1000:A:0:0:0:AD7|talk]]) 23:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:21, 23 July 2013

WikiProject iconTravel and Tourism: Hotels Start‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Hotels.

Notes

Is it necessary to mention that many or most (which I highly doubt) motels are run by Indian immigrants?Pdxgoat 21:16, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You can have your doubts, but this contention of motels run by Asian Indians is supported in an February 27, 2002 article of USA Today. It may seem like a stereotype, but according to the article, there are 17,000 Indian-owned motels, to be precise. In fact, I'll quote from the article: "Asian-Indians own more than 17,000 hotels and motels, representing more than half of all economy lodging in the USA, says the Asian American Hotel Owners Association."

Read the article and weep: http://www.usatoday.com/money/general/2002/02/27/minority-biz.htm


What's the copyright status of the picture? --Robert Merkel


The link to United States highway system was correct. Motels started in the 1920s and 1930s in response to the US highway system and not the Interstate highway system which started in the 1950's.


The copyright status of the picture should be considered in question, as the picture is from the site linked at the bottom of the article. It's on the page for California (http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/motelcalifornia.html) and there is a copyright notice at the bottom. If nobody else cuts it over the next day, I will. User:ClaudeMuncey

I've now removed the image link:
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/wooda/calroute66motel.jpeg
-- Egil 09:07 May 2, 2003 (UTC)

It looks like there are plenty of images of route 66 motels and early motel chain branding already on-wiki; these are available but not in use on this page as it's already rather full of similar and repetitive images at the moment:

A California U.S. Route 66 motel
Roy's Motel and Café US 66 Amboy, CA
Red Crown Tourist Court of Bonnie and Clyde fame
Alamo Plaza Hotel Courts (Waco TX) as the first motel chain
Holiday Inn "Great Sign", used until 1982. One or two of these are in museums, the rest were scrapped.
Howard Johnsons "lamplighter" logo

It's tempting to put the historic police car in the section on "crime and illicit activity" but then the Lorraine Motel (from the MLK assassination) would likely need to be moved or removed. Nonetheless, anything that breaks the illustration pattern of "a motel, another motel, yet another motel..." might be worthy of consideration. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Motel (Brazil)

Curiously, in Brazil, Motel has another conotation. The term is used for Hotels that host suite rooms for couples. I heard some people reffering to these kinds of hotels (or Motels) as Hotels-by-the-hour or 1-hour hotel. The nicest Motels in Brazil have huge suites (some of them can have 400 or 600 square metters) with Jacuzi, dance floor, sauna, steam rooms and even retractable ceeling.

--Pinnecco 18:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same here in Taiwan, for many of the motels (especially high-end designer motels) are commonly used as hourly hotels. They have very huge room, some of them even have 2-story room with a mini waterfall or small swimming pool inside. Although they do offer a 12-hour long stay to motorists, most of the customers who go to this kind of motels see them as love-hotels which are very popular in Japan.--SElefant 16:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may be worth looking at some of the other-language Wikipedia articles on "motel" to see if there's any different international perspective. While the French article just looks like a highly-abridged version of this one, the Portuguese Motel article describes basically an adult motel for short-term (4 hours or less) occupancy with only token acknowledgement that the US original was a "motor hotel" for travellers. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brands and spam

This article has started to acquire links to various motel chains. If all chains in all nations are linked here this article will become mainly a linkfarm (and there would be no principled basis for limiting such links to the US and Canada). To avoid that it would be best to eliminate links to specific chains or brands, and allow links only to sites or pages which deal with the general subject. Kablammo 01:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Motels are constructed between distant cities. But small countries like pakistan has motels inside a city. It is to introduce idea of motel in people. (Engineer Khawar Iqbal from University Of Central Punjab Lahore Pakistan)

motel

what is the difference between a motel, a hotel and a resort? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.150.36 (talk) 11:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motels are a kind of hotel which is inexpensive, basic amenities, placed on long roads between cities, and usually has a certain floor plan (as described in the article). A resort is on the other end of the scale: large, with many amenities, usually located in big tourist spots. (This is from a USA point of view; apparently the distinction is different in other countries.) 64.81.245.109 (talk) 19:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

can we say motel to Dabhas (indian style food place)...jitendra bhatt, india, delhi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.59.66 (talk) 20:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US POV

The entire article has an US POV at the moment. A slightly dominant coverage of the US is expected because motels were invented there but every single example is American. And any specific information is American. Hence I added the tag to warn readers. GizzaDiscuss © 10:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I should qualify my statement somewhat. Not everything is US-related as there is an image of a Malaysian motel but the other three are still American. GizzaDiscuss © 10:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-added the tag. Didn't know it had been there before. Some IP removed it without explanation. I'll also cleaned up some images. There was serious overload.--Crossmr (talk) 11:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to watch is the "motels are being restored and preserved" claim. It's true of U.S. Route 66 where there is US federal funding under the National Park Service Route 66 Corridor Preservation Program; the "period of outstanding historical significance for Route 66 is 1926 to 1970" and everything from roadside diners to drive-ins may qualify for restoration matching grants. That doesn't mean that it's necessarily true anywhere else, whether in the US or in another country. To focus entirely on US 66 and presume the same restoration efforts are being done everywhere else is not only US-centric, but WP:WEIGHT on the eight individual US states served by that road only. Go anywhere else and these are dying a slow death.
I also note that the bit about "motel" as short-stay no-tell motel in South America was in this article here but removed. This connotation appears in both the Spanish and Portuguese languages; I've cited those language wikis (es:Motel and pt:Motel) plus one source used by the Italian version of this page. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy expansion

I saw nothing about the entire world, just the united states. I came here to learn about motels across the world, and what cultures they have. I already know what american hotels are like, seeing as I've been in several.Wikimann1234 (talk) 21:48, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that with the comments about that this article is very US-skewed. Of course, what complicates the situation is that, as I understand it, the motel is very much an institution which has arisen in the USA. What I am thinking of doing is to take the specifically US-oriented material within the article, and collecting this in a sub-section dealing with Motels in the USA. I'd appreciate feedback, pro or con, on this. 124.185.78.196 (talk) 21:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, i disagree with that. Motel is, de facto, american creation. I would fix (or remove) section "Timeline of motels in the United States", expaned History with more data, and Architecture with more international motel styles, and that would be it, i think. --WhiteWriter speaks 21:42, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
International motels is what I was looking for. Main type of accomodation in a lot of places, though sometimes they share the trade with backpackers. Having a room with a kitchen instead of just a bed means you can save money\ensure you can get the food you like. 118.208.74.99 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC).[reply]

US POV again

This page was already tagged as

once before as it is a US-centric mess. Someone removed the tag, not sure why, but I'm afraid I shall have to reinstate it given the latest attempts to turn this back into an article about the United States and remove English spelling instead of WP:RETAINing what was there. K7L (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, it is maintained in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change." Quoting from WP:RETAIN. The article was clearly established in US English (a perfectly acceptable spelling variety) for years before it was changed. A call to expand international coverage is NOT is any way, shape or form a call to change the variety of English used. So your edits actually disrespect WP:RETAIN and the entire WP:ENGVAR guideline and are wrong. Period. As for the international coverage, the international versions section, added after the previous tagging as part of a major expansion satisfied the need for the tag. Is the article a bit US-first? Yes, but as motels originated in the US, that is to be expected. It is clear, by your calling it "English spelling", there by denigrating US spelling, that you need to check WP:ENGVAR and understand it much better. oknazevad (talk) 16:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at this page and its history. It's a mess. Way too much detail about individual US motels that likely aren't even particularly notable. The rewrite only made this worse. Changing the spelling isn't going to fix that, the useless trivia needs to be removed and the page cleaned up. No one cares that some individual lodging in Baton Rouge that used to be good in 1939 is now a dump. 2001:5C0:1000:A:0:0:0:AD7 (talk) 23:21, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]