Talk:Tourism in Namibia

Africa: Namibia High‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Namibia (assessed as Top-importance).

Travel and Tourism Mid‑importance

	Society portal This 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.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notes

uspn (talk) 15:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC) : Can someone please confirm whether the photo of Dune 7 actually is the Dune 7 of Walvis Bay, and not the one in Sossusvlei? If not, the image should be removed/replaced.[reply]

It is definitely not Dune 7 of Sossusvlei ("Big Daddy") because there is no road/track to that one. --Pgallert (talk) 12:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs major overhaul

This article does not provide much useful information and can certainly not claim a proper representation of tourism activities in Namibia. E.g.

Choice of Destinations: No-one will visit Namibia for Windhoek and Walvis Bay. What about the major destinations?
Total lack of information about history and employment
Article doesn't link anything - there are many existing stubs on Namibian tourist destinations
Figures (eg 1 Mio visitors per annum) not right

--Pgallert (talk) 12:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seal culling

Copying discussion from User talk:Pgallert and User talk:Noodlenicky, as it is relevant to this article. --Pgallert (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Noodlenicky, I reverted your edits to Namibia and to Tourism in Namibia. The topic is extensively covered at Seal hunting and mentioned in the Cape Cross article. The boycott drive did not have any impact so far, and for as long as this is the case, seal culling does not have anything to do with tourism. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Best regards, Pgallert (talk) 20:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Pgallert,

I can see that seal culling should perhaps not feature in the main article on Namibia. However, I strongly feel that it should at least be mentioned in the article on Tourism in Namibia, because many tourists go there to see the seals, and many people don't know about the 'culling'. If no one knows about it, how will they ever reach the article on seal 'hunting', which talks about Namibia, seeing as there is no link to it from the Tourism in Namibia page? For the sake of the issue at hand, and the cruelty and barbarism of the practice, please at least put in a link as described. The only reason I can think of for not doing this is out of support for the 'cull' :/ especially as I have just noticed that you happen to live in Windhoek. Please allow someone from outside your country to make these decisions in cases where you may be biased. (I too am biased, because of the hideous cruelty, but I don't live there.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noodlenicky (talk • contribs) 12:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Noodlenicky, that I live in Namibia does not mean I cannot edit articles on Namibia, in fact I am one of only two people regularly contributing. Seriously, to connect "tourism" with "seal culling" you need a reference, otherwise the slaughter of the seals belongs into Economy of Namibia (it makes a minimal contribution) or better Environmental issues in Namibia--unfortunately this article does not yet exist.

To employ an analogy, tourists visit the Waterberg and see a handful of German war graves there, not realising that more than 100,000 people were killed in the Herero and Namaqua Genocide which left those few soldiers dead. That's not a good reason to link the genocide from the Tourism article, either.

I have no particular opinion of whether to cull or not. I find the way cattle are killed, or pigs are castrated, or chicken are kept, not much nicer than that. That baby seals are cute does not change much for me. --Pgallert (talk) 13:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Pgallert, thank you for clarifying. I too don't like the way cattle and other animals are killed (hence am vegetarian) but that's another issue... By 'reference' do you mean something like a newspaper article? For example the following?

http://www.namibian.com.na/news-articles/national/full-story/archive/2011/march/article/anti-sealing-day-targets-namibian-tourism-exports

http://www.observer.com.na/component/content/article/12-slideshow/725-seal-culling-controversy-rages-on

http://www.witness.co.za/index.php?showcontent&global[_id]=62807

http://mg.co.za/article/2011-06-15-animal-rights-group-urge-namibia-boycott

Thanks,

Noodlenicky (talk) 14:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for instance. As a campaigner against culling you are surely aware that the issue is not uncontested; one of the disagreements (whether seals eat too much fish) is described at seal hunting. The technical point is that an external link with no connection to the rest of the article is not acceptable. A sentence together with a reference or two would be more appropriate, although because of WP:DUE, both sides should be covered in this debate. Sorry if it sounds cynical, but all nations that have large seal populations are actually culling them. The threat of boycotting Namibian exports and tourism had absolutely zero impact; Namibia was actually promoted instead of demoted as a tourist destination in 2011 when the protests were announced first. So feel free to mention the threat and reference it, but please do not blow the proportions in order to maintain a balanced coverage. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]