Talk:Lonely Planet

"controversy"
An anon using two IPs has twice put in a POV paragraph saying that Lonely Planet reflects a colonial output. I've reverted it both times, since it lacks sources or any reason for being written, actually. A similar complaint can be made about most travel literature - which might be legitimate thing to have in wikipedia, but not just dumped here. - DavidWBrooks 21:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lonelyplanetlogo.png
Image:Lonelyplanetlogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Would anyone like to upload a new logo that has a fair use rationale?Misterx2000 (talk) 17:06, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

history of dominating Indonesia??
Why does the history section busy itself with a paragraph on LP's presence in Indonesia?

To me that reads as totally irrelevant. I propose to move that to the LP Indonesia page (if it exists) and remove it from the general history of Lonely Planet.85.227.226.174 17:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

other languages
Today lonely planets are avaliable in several languages. On the LP homepage you find links to german, french, spanish, italian, chinese and japanese sites. Perhaps there are also other languages offered. In german for example only 38 books are avaliable so far. I believe a small section about other languages would be appropriate. -- 89.61.119.54 14:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

fabrication claim
Lonely Planet author Thomas Kohnstamm claimed that he fabricated information in the book, that he never went to one of the countries, Columbia. Is this notable? Shawnc (talk) 06:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's very notable, he's the author/co-author of a dozen LP books. This is still very new, but it should probably have a heading of its own in the article. Probably the biggest scandal ever to hit LP. JdeJ (talk) 07:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If you read the LP japan for example, and travel there you get the impression that the writer(s) have gone to a different country... --Godal (talk) 11:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed! Having lived and traveled extensively in China for a year, I (and every other person in our group) can tell you that those guides were shite.  The "map" of the city we lived in was a measly 4k bloc that didn't even include all of one of its 6 districts. 67.188.79.209 (talk) 12:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It's highly relevant and raises issues of ethics in travel writing. I find LP is not very welcoming when I have written with specific details about my trips and how improvements could be made to the LP books I have used. Why don't the authors updating the books contact feedback givers like me ? One wonders where they are getting their info.?

I offered to be a writer and noone specifically got back to me.

I think the authors need to be better supported, especially financially. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.76.208.223 (talk) 13:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

"chinglish"
Has anyone read the history secotion? It reads like an insimpit version of Shanghai history by the PRC. It really needs to modified ASAP.... very suprised it hasn't been edited in ages. - [[User:Aruhnka|aruhnka]01:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've cleaned up the History section, which now flows better.Misterx2000 (talk) 07:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Overall cleanup
I cleaned up this article as best as i could, incorporating most of the comments above. the introuction was completely outdated, and the history section was a mess. i used a radio interview with Tony Wheeler (the founder) for some of teh facts. Mtl1969 (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The entire article requires further revision and updating in May 2014. I think that I have completed the first half of the article as part of this process, and I will move onto the second half over the next week.--Soulparadox (talk) 08:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Bias
Perhaps a paragraph about alledged bias of their guides should be added to the controversy section. For example, http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=78&x_article=200 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.80.186 (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Guidebooks, almost by definition, are a collection of opinions: they include this city but not that one, this hotel but not that one, praise this sight but criticize that one, mention this bit of history but not that one. Almost every sentence in any guidebook could be labeled as "bias" (a loaded word which implies that your opinion is true while theirs is deliberately wrong) by somebody who prefers a different slant. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Obviously that's the case with traveller's concerns, namely restaurants, hotels and attractions, but when a guide book is taking a politicised view of the country's history, then there is a controvesy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.49.145 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 19 November 2008


 * The article you're referring to is 8 years old and is from an organization that is criticised for providing a very biased view on things itself. So i don;t think this provides any reason to add this kind of criticism. Mtl1969 (talk) 13:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

yes but the bias of this organisation against criticism of Israel does not mean that it is inherently anti-guidebook or anti-lonely planet, therefore your point that the article is useless doesn't stand. There are of course other sources: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.49.145 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 19 November 2008
 * http://travel.booklocker.com/2008/07/23/lonely-planet-goes-all-fair-and-balanced-on-us/
 * http://www.reviewscout.com/1864502770
 * http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2008/07/why-are-guidebo.html

As a regular commenter on Conservative Home, it should not be presented as an unbiased website or authoritative statement on LP assiduousness. CAMERA makes some good quotations from the LP Israel book, which I hope have been tidied up in a more recent edition, but cannot be trusted as a source because of the agenda behind it. It is a presentation of evidence in a way as to put across a POV, and as such does not belong on Wiki except as a reference or footnote. Having it as a resource is good, but the arguments it presents are just as biased as a Palestinian source complaining about Fodor's.

I agree with the original assertion - that guidebooks should refrain from obnoxious political viewpoints in either direction. I tend to use Rough Guide myself but at the moment am using Lonely Planet guide to the Baltic States because Rough Guide doesn't appear print one covering that region. People who let their politics get the better of them end up like Thomas Kohnstamm.

Incidentally, did Lonely Planet ever rescind its boycott of Norway because of the minke whale hunt? Shouldn't that be referenced here? Lstanley1979 (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

->I'm not suggesting that we present these opinions as facts in the article, however i do think that it's important to note that some people and oragnisations hold these opinons, and that it is an appropriate subject to write about under the controversy section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.102.208 (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

92.19.102.208, stop pushing this- there is obviously no support for your view. as i said before- the article you refer to is 9 years old. hardly a reliable source. you need to find some broader evidence than just this one CAMERA article and some anonymous posts on a blog. also, pls get a proper login handle if you start posting on my talk page. Mtl1969 (talk) 22:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

-> 2 people disagree so there is no support? You seem to be missing the point. As i have said, i'm not suggesting that we present the opinion that lonely planet has political bias as fact, merely that the allegation has been made (which is clearly the case). The posted sources are not unreliable when trying to find attitudes towards bias in certain lonely planet publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.209.190 (talk) 22:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

controversies
apart from teh fact that Wikipedia discourages 'controversies' sections, the paragraph about 'Turkey for Christmas' can hardly be called worthy of an encyclopedia. it concerns one photo, in a single LP publication (a magazine) which is only published in one country (the UK). Apart from that, the 'controversial' article in question talks about how some greek islands are really close to the Turkish coast so an image of a greek island in an article about Turkey should not be controversial. I will leave this a few days and unless anybody objects i will remove it Mtl1969 (talk) 10:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you; kill it. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * done Mtl1969 (talk) 13:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Paradise Updated
Unsure is this represents a controversy. The book has just been released and press has been limited. The addition of the quote from Max Barry has been added elsewhere and it represents a blurb from the book's cover - clearly marketing material framed as potential controversy so I've deleted it here. GeorgieFamingo (talk) 13:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Kohnstamm controversy
His book was about Brazil, not Colombia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.252.84 (talk) 07:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Largest in the world?
I think that the claim about being the largest in the world needs a citation. I think it also could do with clarification: in what sense the largest? (annual turnover? number of publications? or one/many of many other possibilities). FrankSier (talk) 11:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a fair point and I will conduct research on this matter as part of my revision of the entire article.--Soulparadox (talk) 08:49, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Tony and Maureen Wheeler
Maureen Wheeler states "Wheeler was born in Belfast, Northern Ireland and moved to London at the age 20, where she met her future husband, Tony Wheeler on a park bench in London on 7 October 1970." whereas this article says "He [Tony] met his wife Maureen Wheeler in Sydney in 1973, following a lengthy trip from Turkey, through Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, to India and Nepal." Which is correct? -- Chuq (talk) 21:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears that this matter has been addressed, through the simplification of the text, and I am now revising the entire article, as it was outdated and sub-standard. I will move onto the Wheelers's pages in due course.--Soulparadox (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Recommended corrections from Lonely Planet
We’re keen for the Wikipedia page about our brand to be as accurate as possible. Rather than amending any factual inaccuracies ourselves, we thought the most impartial thing to do would be to note here in the Talk section our recommended corrections, for other users to make if they agree with the validity of them. These are in order as they appear in the article from top to bottom. Thanks. -- Seb, Social Communications Manager for Lonely Planet (London office).

SIDE BOX COPY

Current text: Founded 1972 Correction: Founded 1973 Source: ‘The Lonely Planet Story’ by Tony & Maureen Wheeler (published September 2010, ISBN: 9781742202303). Page: 204. http://shop.lonelyplanet.com/world/the-lonely-planet-story/

Current text: Under key people, Gus Balbontin is listed as the CTO. Correction: Gus Balbontin is no longer the CTO. Source: No up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

MAIN ENTRY COPY

Current text: ‘As of 2011, the company had sold 120 million books since inception and in early 2014, it had sold around 11 million units of its travel apps.[5]’ Correction: It has printed 130 million. And, this many apps have been downloaded, not sold. Source: No up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

Current text:  ‘Other Lonely Planet offices are spread throughout the world, in locations such as London, United Kingdom (U.K.); Beijing, China; and Delhi, India.[5]’ Correction: Office also in Oakland, U.S. Source: http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

Current text: ‘Other travel guide brand names also emerged in the early 1970s, such as Rough Guides and Bradt.[10]’ Correction: Rough Guides started in 1982 Source: http://www.roughguides.com/about-us/

Current text: ‘The six-person Oakland, U.S. team was also dismissed and, overall, many of the positions that were removed were content and editorial positions.[5]’ Correction: A sales and marketing team still operates out of that office, and our US warehouse remains in operation there. Source: No up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

Current text: ‘Lonely Planet's much-vaunted website has seen a 48% decrease in traffic over the last 11 months.[26] There has been no announcement yet of the 'new content model', promised in 2013.’ Correction: This is inaccurate for the period: September 2013 to September 2014 Source: https://siteanalytics.compete.com/lonelyplanet.com?t=site_profiles&q=lonelyplanet.com
 * Note: the US is the largest geographic segment of site traffic.

Current text: ‘Lonely Planet's online community, the Thorn Tree,[27] was created in 1996. It is used by over 600,000 travelers to share their experiences and look for advice.’ Correction: The size of our user base is more than 1 million. Source: http://www.communitymanagers.nl/2010/07/25/interview-with-venessa-paech-community-manager-for-lonelyplanet-com/
 * Note: the Thorntree community has grown since the publishing of this article.

Current text: ‘The Lonely Planet website includes travel articles, destination and point of interest guides, hotel, hostel and accommodations listings, and the ability to rate and review sites and restaurants.’ Correction: Rating and reviewing sites and restaurants was removed in December 2012. Source: No up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

Current text: ‘Now, the forum is regulated regularly and allows users to flag responses they deem inappropriate or not relevant.’ Correction: An abuse reporting system was introduced in the third iteration of the forums and has been a feature of the site since 2002. Source: No up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

Current text: ‘In 2009, Lonely Planet began publishing a monthly travel magazine called Lonely Planet Traveller in the UK, and in 2010, it launched the Indian[31] and the Argentine[32] editions. Its Korean edition, with a digital edition for iPad, was launched in March 2011.[33] Also, its Chinese version was launched in Mainland China in Aug, 2012.’ Correction: Digital edition of Lonely Planet Traveller (UK) for iPad was launched 2012. The Lonely Planet Magazine is published in the following different editions: Argentina, France, Germany, Spain, Thailand, China, Taiwan, India, Korea & Singapore Additionally, Lonely Planet guidebooks are published in 12 languages (other than English): French, German, Italian, Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese, Chinese, Korean, Danish, Norwegian, Czech, Hebrew & Russian. Source: No singular up-to-date online source, but this can be verified by getting in touch with the company via emailing http://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact/

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lonely Planet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120224071023/http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/97083.html to http://bailey83221.livejournal.com/97083.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091106194835/http://natgeotv.com.au/programmes/lonely-planet-roads-less-travelled/biographies to http://natgeotv.com.au/programmes/lonely-planet-roads-less-travelled/biographies

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:36, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Purchase by BBC Worldwide
I think that there are a couple of things wrong in the following:


 * "In October 2007, the Wheelers and Australian businessman John Singleton, who became a shareholder in 1999, negotiated a put option agreement with BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the BBC, resulting in the latter's purchase of a 75% stake in the company, worth an estimated £63 million at the time; the Wheelers retained the other 25%. A put options frees the owner from any obligation to sell a specified amount of an underlying security at a specified price within a specified time, and instead provides the owner with the right to make such a sale"

The put option agreement didn't result in the BBC's purchase of a 75% stake; rather, the sale of a 75% stake was agreed at the same time as a put option agreement on the remaining 25%. This is as per reference 19.

The definition of a put option is wrong: there's no freeing of the owner from any obligation to sell as there would never have been an obligation in the first place. Rather, a put option is the right, but not the obligation, to sell at a certain price. This is as per reference 18.

Unless there any objections here in the next few days, I will correct the text. Zin92 (talk) 05:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Changes made. Zin92 (talk) 06:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

More suggested amends from Lonely Planet
Hi there. I posted in here a while back with some suggested amends on behalf of Lonely Planet. I'm a member of the marketing team here in the London office. Fully aware of Wikipedia's COI policies so just wanted to note some things here for the editors of our page to consider to update, further to the above ones already noted in the past. In contrast to my note above, I’ve only added things below that there are online link resources to back up (though, they are on our own website). Any issues with this or questions, we can be contacted via social@lonelyplanet.com. Thanks, Wikipedians - Seb :)

-

SIDEBOX COPY

Current text: Parent company: NC2 Media

Correction: Lonely Planet Global, Inc.

Source: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/legal/privacy-policy/

Current text: Publication types: Books, apps, online community

Correction: We also now have a video platform on the site and a US magazine (as mentioned in article already, but a source has been provided to further illustrate this).

Source: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/video, https://www.lonelyplanet.com/usmagazine

MAIN BODY COPY

Current text: As of 2014, Lonely Planet's largest office is located in Footscray, a suburb of Melbourne, Australia

Correction: The Melbourne office is now located in a different suburb of Melbourne, in Carlton.

Source: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/contact

- 195.11.179.106 (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Reply 13-JUL-2018

 * 1) ✅ The Carlton office was added, replacing the mention of the Footscray office.
 * 2) ✅ Video and print magazine were added to the infobox's publication type parameter.
 * 3) ❌ The infobox's parent company parameter was not updated. Text in the lead section of the article states that NC2 Media is the parent organization. A request to alter this text in the lead has not been made; thus, changing the parent organization parameter in the infobox alone would have created a contradiction within the article. For this proposal to be approved, a request must be submitted to have both instances in the article changed, along with references which verify this change.
 * Regards,  spintendo   17:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

-

Follow-up suggested amend from Lonely Planet
Per the last comment/edit, thanks for updating some of that which was requested. This is a follow-up request to update both the infobox copy AND first sentence of the article to reflect the correct, current parent company of Lonely Planet and other entities within the group, which is 'Lonely Planet Global, Inc.' (based in Wyoming, USA). Further details on this are noted in our latest privacy policy, here: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/legal/privacy-policy/. Thanks! - Seb (Lonely Planet)

195.11.179.106 (talk) 09:53, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Reply 16-JUL-2018
Additional actions were performed during this edit: The COI editor should feel free to offer further suggestions on how to improve the article, and may do so here on the talk page at their earliest convenience. Regards,  spintendo   13:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ The parent company parameter was updated.
 * ❌ The request that the first sentence in the article be "changed to reflect the correct, current parent company of Lonely Planet and other entities within the group" was partially implemented, in that the prior information on NC2 Media was removed. However, a replacement sentence was not inserted, because no such verbatim proposal for how this sentence should be worded was submitted.
 * The lead section contained an inordinate focus on the company's offices, listing the size of the Australia office and the significance of the US office in terms of its position within the US division, details which are not needed in the lead section on the parent company. These have been omitted.
 * The article's problems with over-quotation and its excessively-exampled narrative of recent company history — including details on mergers and acquisitions described in 1,868 words covering more than 4 separate sections — have both been highlighted with maintenance templates. These should help draw the attention of editors to these issues in order that they may be fixed and the article improved.

Link Rogue planet?
Should the disambiguation clause of this article also link Rogue planet? I'm not a native speaker of English and came here looking for the topic of that article, because it seemed like an obvious title for what I wanted to know. Some more searching was then needed to find the other article. -- 194.39.218.10 (talk) 13:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Suggested logo update from Lonely Planet
I am a employee at Lonely Planet.

Recently I made a small edit to the infobox to reflect that headquarters of Lonely Planet is now Fort Mill, South Carolina. Lonely Planet's parent Red Ventures are based there.

Further to this, Lonely Planet have updated their logo as of December 6 2021, which is now live on its website.

I have been unable to upload the logo myself to this point without triggering several restriction notices on filename and type of image.

I would welcome suggestions on how to make this change.

Tomhalltravel (talk) 11:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)Tom Hall — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomhalltravel (talk • contribs) 11:40, 8 December 2021 (UTC)