Talk:Finland Voyage Tips and guide

The article now says that "Advance tickets for overnight trains only allow the booking of a seat, not of a bed", which seems strange. I suppose everybody will book their beds beforehand, rather than just trust their luck – and there would be quite some chaos if people tried to book that bed on the train. Are the sleeper tickets (or some of them) available later than those just for seats? Or is this just a bad joke? --LPfi (talk) 17:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Maybe the person adding that has been editing the wrong country article? For sleeping trains I've always bought all the tickets beforehand either at the station or online, and nothing on VR's site suggests this would've changed. --ϒpsilon (talk) 19:08, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

In "Places to eat", LPfi just updated lunch prices, thanks for that. Nevertheless, to my understanding we're trying to give the reader a general idea of what a lunch would cost, and therefore I think we should give the range in euros without cents, ie. "around €10", "€8-11" or something like that. The current "exact" version almost implies that there are some legal limits on what a lunch is allowed to cost... --ϒpsilon (talk) 11:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right. I noticed the earlier price range was labelled "in 2011", and was too lazy to figure out how to round it sensibly. The sums are exact in that the coupons are of fixed value (10.40, 9.80, 9.30 and 8.70) and having to add change without taking something extra would upset those using them – but that is just unnecessary trivia for the traveller. --LPfi (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Voyagers rarely carry Finnish lunch tickets :) --ϒpsilon (talk) 14:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

No, but prices are set to the nominal value of the tickets, as those paying with the tickets tend to choose alternatives with those prices. But never mind the details. Some travellers may of course be puzzled by several places serving lunch to the exactly same price, so if we have a good compact wording there is nothing wrong with giving some background. --LPfi (talk) 17:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I'd say the opening hours of shops are pretty much the same as in Europe in general, if not even slightly longer. For example in Germany and everything further south, it's not normal for shops to operate on Sundays. ϒψιλον (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Yes, probably. I suppose somebody has been travelling in countries where longer hours are common. We could just give the hours. --LPfi (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

This is probably a holdover from the era when shopping hours were legally limited. In the United States, they were and are not, so there was a contrast. Today, we have even some Prismas open 24 h. --Vuo (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

There is also the weak trade union tradition in USA, and the trade unions having become weaker in Finland. There is little need for legislation of shopping hours if night-time and Sunday wages are high. They are still too high for most grocery stores to operate 24 h. Such operations are mostly limited to places serving long-distance lorry drivers (thus having enough customers round the clock) and those with a very large customer base in the neighbourhood (such as in Helsinki). --LPfi (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

I undid an edit that changed racism not being a problem in "the cosmopolitan major cities" to it not being a problem in "the Helsinki area", and added organized pickpockets arriving from Africa. The latter seems highly unlikely, the long voyage seems to be too expensive to be worthwhile – and isn't it hard to get the needed visas?

But I wonder if also the old sentence is prejudice; Nagu was a prime example on how immigrants were welcomed in the local community and the "tomato capital" Närpes has a long tradition of welcoming immigrants to work. I suppose there are places off the beaten track where foreigners are rare and met with prejudice, but are those prejudices typical for the countryside? I suppose racist gangs being a problem rather in towns than in villages.

I know racism can be a problem, and I would recommend to keep a low profile in nightclub closing hours if you are obviously non-Finnish, but I really don't know whether racism otherwise is a problem for visitors to the country. Does anybody know? What wordings should we use?

--LPfi (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Here's my take on it.

Pickpocketing, burglaries and other property crimes inasfar they are perpetrated by foreigners, are to my understanding mostly perpetrated by folks from the so-called new EU-countries.

Overall Finland is about as safe for non-white visitors and immigrants as western Europe in general. In smaller rural communities, I'd say people ("who've never been abroad and never will") have more prejudices against foreigners, than in major cosmopolitan areas where it's common to see and interact with people from different cultures every day. Though racism is much less of a problem in Swedish-speaking Finland, where as you mentioned it's quite common that people from the all over the world have integrated well also into small towns. Organized racism with Nordic resistance movement flags and baseball bats, on the other hand, is more prevalent in bigger cities where they have "more to protest against". But again, Finland is not by a long shot particularly dangerous for non-white foreigners to visit. Ypsilon (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Makes sense. I think it may boil down to that warnings are unnecessary, and we hope that not approaching those people with bats and NRM flags in a dark alley at pub clothing times is common sense (which we often recommend using). In the rural communities people might be staring, but they will not go to fetch a bat and getting stares is not something we need to warn about. --LPfi (talk) 20:10, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, one has to put it into perspective, and we need just to look 800 km southeast where a few years ago someone from Caucasus or Central Asia was suspected of a stabbing, and locals then started a race riot and the government arrested thousands of immigrants to appease them... Ypsilon (talk) 20:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Please correct your list of cities: both Espoo and Vantaa are independent towns and larger than any of the following ones on your listing. I would also suggest a change of the title: there is only one city in Finland. —The preceding comment was added by Paj (talk • contribs)

Paj, you can change this yourself. Why don't you do so if no-one expresses any opposition within the next 2 days? Also, when you post to talk pages, please sign by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row at the end of each post. Welcome to Wikivoyage! I'll post a welcome message with some useful links on your user talk page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:08, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

It's true that Espoo and Vantaa are separate cities; the notion probably is a leftover from the time when our Helsinki article wasn't districtified. But the likely reason for why they were put there in the first place is that the whole Capital Region from a traveler's point of view is one single city. I think we could just remove the references to Espoo and Vantaa.

To your other points, since when has there been only one city (kaupunki) in Finland? Yes, there is only one "metropolitan area" (defined as having a million inhabitants and more), and this is Helsinki, Espoo and Vantaa (and tiny Kauniainen) combined, Helsinki proper has about 650,000 inhabitants. As a side note, they're not all individually larger than any other city in Finland as Tampere is a more populous than Vantaa.

Thirdly, on Wikivoyage we call all articles of places where people live "cities", while "other destinations" are for articles of national parks, particularly large theme parks and the like. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, both, for the info and comments. I quite see your point in choosing ”city”, but is it stated anywhere? Traditional usage guides comprehension strongly. I stand corrected when it comes to comparing the sizes of Tampere and Vantaa. Paj (talk) 12:14, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

It's in Wikivoyage:Geographical hierarchy#Cities and Wikivoyage:Small city article template, and doubtless in other places, because the definition of "city" on this site is fundamental to Wikivoyage's system of "breadcrumb navigation", which is based on a hierarchy that typically has "cities" at the bottom (along with such recognized non-city destinations as parks and airports). We don't have separate templates or site terms for cities, towns, villages and hamlets, and if you think about it, if we did, we would be constantly engaging in useless, travel-irrelevant debates about whether Destination X is a city, town, village or whatever. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:04, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

I deleted Espoo and Vantaa from the list as they're the same destination as Helsinki from a visitor's point of view, and we per 7 2 only allow a maximum of 9 cities in a list (except for the region right above cities, parks etc. in the hierarchy). Ypsilon (talk) 19:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

An IP user has been adding taxi information, mainly on two taxi apps, to a lot of Finnish city articles. I have no idea whether the IPv6 address is stable, so not relying on direct communication (I will put a link to here from the IP user talk).

I am not sure how to handle this. It is clear that the info should be added to Finland#By taxi instead of all these pages, if the companies are relevant country wide – but I have no idea of whether they are of any use outside some areas. The crucial question is whether some actual taxi driver in the vicinity can be reached with those apps, and I suppose you need local info to know. The company can claim coverage even if only a tiny percentage of drivers, usually having to drive a long distance to get to you, are connected.

The general problem has existed since the taxi reform: taxis and call centres are no more locally bound, and any company can claim as large an area of coverage as they want. I am not a frequent customer, so have little data from the ground.

--LPfi (talk) 11:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps the user registered: Vkem has made similar edits. Copying my talk page message. --LPfi (talk) 11:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

I removed links to these sites from the article, as I don't think our External links policy allows them. They might be useful, however, for updating the article (watch out, though, for sampling bias).

• finlandprices.com
• travelpricewatch.com

--LPfi (talk) 09:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

There is a new trend of national taxi services appearing in Nordic countries. They have easy to use smartphone apps which make the order process clear, like Uber. They claim to have near-nationwide coverage or coverage of list of specific cities. What we should do regarding them? I think they would give additional advantage for Wikivoyage users compared to having only phone call numbers of local taxi companies, regarding that many Wikivoyage users do not have English as their first language, and may have trouble pronouncing local language street addresses. So should we include them if they say that they cover specific regions? --Vkem (talk) 00:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

See Travellers' pub#National taxi services. I suggest we keep the discussion there, until it is down to national details. –LPfi (talk) 07:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Regarding national details, Taksit.fi search engine is official website of Taksiliitto (taxi association of Finland) and they have local taxi company contact details. So if we want to improve local taxi information of towns and municipalities, the info can be found from there. I would guess they would be realiable service because the official taxi association suggests to use them.

For me it gave zero hits for Savukoski and only a firm I have never heard about for Pargas (none for Nagu). I think I have had difficulties getting any meaningful information from them also earlier. –LPfi (talk) 17:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: I am sympathetic to trying to keep the box reasonably short, but I think the worst problem was some old baggage, which I didn't take the time to rewrite as restrictions are going to change in a few days, perhaps with more drastic changes in a week or two.

I think it was reasonable to mention from what kind of baseline the situation is deteriorating. From having had none or a few people in hospital we now have tens, not hundreds or thousands. "Quickly rising" should be put in that perspective. Incidence is now doubling every few weeks, but is still not worse than in most of Europe – and the rate could change any week, if the reactions are sufficient (in Vaasa, where incidence rose dramatically last week, students stopped all events and the universities on-campus lectures for two weeks).

Splitting the covid box in two, one in the lead, one in Get in, makes it more difficult to keep the information complete, up to date and coherent. Most edits will probably be in one of the places, doubling information and leaving some outdated information in either place. Skipping the box in the lead is not too difficult for the reader, and the information can be trimmed somewhat (I think that on travel restrictions is quite irrelevant at the moment, as they probably will be revised tomorrow, and some wording elsewhere was probably less than ideal).

I think I won't try to keep up with the news with the current setup, but please reword in a way that is still accurate after a month.

–LPfi (talk) 15:28, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

(Sorry for the tone, I am quite irritable at the moment, for non-WV related reasons. I understand the edit was one to expect on a wiki, intended as good cooperation. –LPfi (talk) 15:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC))Reply

I understand being irritable at the moment. The news day to day is depressing, especially if you have other things in your life to deal with.

I think not many people are travelling at the moment, but many may be reading Wikivoyage to plan for future trips, or to dream of a world in which travel is possible. That's why I think it is a mistake to fill the reader's screen up with COVID warnings and make them scroll down. I think that putting the entry restrictions under Get In makes sense, and if they are going to change frequently, then maybe it would be better to write them in a general way, and point readers to official sources for up-to-date info, rather than trying to keep up with the changes here. COVID information doesn't have to be at the top of the article -- it's not like anyone doesn't know that COVID is going on, or that COVID is unique to Finland.

If it makes sense to include stronger wording on the the extent of the problem in Finland now, then we should add something in. I just don't think that a week-by-week recounting of the situation is appropriate for a travel guide. Let's focus on the current situation. I hope that your non-WV issues go better. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 18:36, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Few people travelling now makes sense. In fact even most domestic travel is recommended against right now. I hope the development will turn in a few weeks, otherwise we will get real problems. I cut it down radically now. Details can be reinserted if the situation improves. –LPfi (talk) 17:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

There are probably going to be outbreaks here and there with local restrictions on meetings, events and nightclubs and whatnot coming into effect (and ending?) quickly so I agree we should keep the box short unless something really dramatical happens. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

I hope the new restrictions and awakened awareness will get the R0 down, and the situation stabilizing. Outbreaks will come and go, but if they can be contained there will not be any need for unexpected measures. Then we can describe the range of possibilities and leave to the traveller to check the local situation. I sincerely hope Vaasa will succeed (many cases, but in specific groups, which can self-isolate), but I am really worried about Helsinki, where I don't see an easy way out. –LPfi (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Personally I think the Vaasa outbreak will pan out just like the ones in Jyväskylä and Kuhmo, though of course one never knows. Thankfully corona seems to be a virus spreading through people being close together with an infected person for a period of time rather than just walking past an infected person on the street (with neither wearing masks?), so I'm myself not that worried about the situation here in Helsinki either, but again one never knows how this continues... Ypsilon (talk) 20:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

For Vaasa, yes, I think there is good hope. But in Helsinki, if people don't know how they got it, the symptomless ones will continue to spread it at work, on the metro and in the pubs. You'd have to close everything down for two weeks, and I cannot see how to do that in Helsinki. –LPfi (talk) 21:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Or: close the borders and have people stay at home. :-( It was successful in the spring. I am not sure people are willing to do it again until the situation gets really serious. –LPfi (talk) 21:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

I've started a general discussion about what to do with COVID-19 boxes here: Template talk:COVID-19 box. This issue isn't unique to the Finland article. Ground Zero (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

We should have some warning for the Matkahuolto route planner, but I don't know its limitations and biases. Its discription says:

This service is provided by Matkahuolto for route planning in Finland. The service covers public transport, walking, cycling, and some private car use. Service is built on Digitransit platform.

In Swedish it has a caveat: "with some limitations" (not only regarding car use).

And when I search for connections from one railway station to another, I am advised to take a bus route with three transfers. Are long distance trains included at all?

The description says that "public transport routes and timetables are downloaded from Traficom's national public transit database". What modes of transport are available there? Are the long-distance trains absent from the database or just ignored?

–LPfi (talk) 14:01, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Vkem, Ypsilon: –LPfi (talk) 14:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

This one? Yes, there seems to be just bus, walking, bike and car as options; no trains at all. In addition it does just want to give one bus connection at a time when looking at some randomly picked routes. For example from Kouvola to Helsinki tomorrow, it gives you one trip with a transfer in Karhula, whereas liput.matkahuolto.fi gives you two direct routes. Clicking on the walking, cycling and driving icons doesn't yield any results. Overall I'd say that route planner isn't very useful.

They do also have the icons for Helsinki region public transport (BTW this planner looks a lot like the former version of the Helsinki route planner), which isn't too useful when going from, say, Pori to Turku or Keuruu to Jyväskylä. (Just in Fingerpori the metro goes further :D). Ypsilon (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ah! It was the HRT image I mistook for a train – I got some regional trains as part of the route, when searching for connections from Karis. –LPfi (talk) 16:24, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Nope, looks like they want to censor VR's long distance services for whatever reason, as even Karis to Åbo is by local train and bus via Helsinki. As said, not a very informative travel planner. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

That was among my first tries, but Karis to Åbo is long-distance, while rather short as such :-) –LPfi (talk) 22:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

The whatever reason may be simply that VR is their competitor, as are aeroplanes, which are also not suggested for a voyage to Lapland. I haven't tried to get them to suggest driving, but I'd not be surprised if they made some odd choices also for those with car. –LPfi (talk) 22:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

It's in practice really just a bus planner with the capital region's public transport network added or vice versa. Ypsilon (talk) 13:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Question: What is the maximum number of times a taxi service can be added to an article? The answer is of course, one. But if you've been following up on User talk:Vkem#Finnish taxis, again, you'd have noticed that 02 Taksi is added to so many cities and towns. But for the matter, it is useful knowing where certain companies operate nationwide, but at the same time, it doesn't give a fair chance of local taxi companies and a traveller won't get a fair perspective if the same company is just listed the umpteenth time. If that was for all cities, Uber would be listed in about 15000 articles (that's hyperbole of course, but it would almost appear in every US and Australian article, as well as most of Europe). Ypsilon has suggested that it goes in the Finland article, and I also believe the same as well, but what does the broader community think? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I think that the app can be mentionned by name (with no link) in a city, but only have listing details at a country level (or state or county if that is where the regulations differ). So in a city we would have "Taxiapp1 and Taxiapp2 operate here", before the listings of the local companies. More can be said in city articles if we have on the ground knowledge of the different apps (number of drivers in a city etc) - "the one driver for Taziapp2 is often not online before 10:00". AlasdairW (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

That could also work. Though the problem would be keeping all of them up to date (which is what we have right now). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:25, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I suppose Vkem has some half-automatic tools that make the checking and editing he does easy. As he does not communicate there are two problems: we don't know whether him not having updated the app sentences is because they don't need updating or because he just hasn't taken the time (and others not having the tools need to check manually), and we don't know the criteria for mentioning a taxi service in a specific article. The call centre companies (at least some of them) do state on their web pages in what municipalities they are active (and in what hours, not everywhere around the clock), but I don't know whether that means there is at least one car that claims to serve the municipality or whether they do so only when they have working coverage. Vkem has checked at least for some places that the service is usable, but I don't know whether the check was for one arbitrary voyage at one arbitrary time or something more thorough. –LPfi (talk) 06:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The common system in Finland is that drivers connected to a call centre can take or ignore (refuse?) a drive at will, but refusing more than sporadically may get them thrown out of the system. I don't know the specifics of the contracts and I don't know any driver in the countryside (and seldom use taxis) so I don't know how this works out in practice. I know that some types of drives are unattractive to drivers, and some drivers do try to avoid them. –LPfi (talk) 06:28, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

We mention Google Maps, Apple Maps, Opas.matka.fi and Reittiopas.matkahuolto.fi in the lead of Get around here. Do we need to mention them at lower levels? We do link Matkahuolto.fi and VR.fi, as I think those are the canonical sites for coaches and trains, but I am unhappy about the wording "Matka.fi includes information about few services to nearby ruralside." in e.g. Kristinestad. Does it find any connections not found by Matkahuolto? What connections? If it is the best site for some connections, I'd like to know what connections those are, so that I can remove the link if they cease to exist. If we just guess there might be such connections, I think it is enough to mention the site here. I'd love to have a link somewhere, where pros and cons of those aggregators are discussed (Wikipedia? A travel topic? A project page?). A summary of that discussion should appear here in Get in; we have something, but as I don't know them, what I have written is very vague, and others don't seem to have done much better. –LPfi (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Historic destinations in Finland are mentioned in Swedish Empire, Russian Empire and World War II in Europe. Should we have an article which covers Finland's history as an independent country? /Yvwv (talk) 17:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

If somebody is going to write it, just go ahead. However, I don't like stubs, and getting the right focus is not necessarily easy. And I am not planning to be a main author of it.

I don't think the article should be restricted to independent Finland though: the national awakening was during Russian times, and the foundation of Finland lies in the Swedish times. Leaving those out feels weird, history-less or something worse. The linked articles mention Finnish history, but I have tried to keep the Finnish part small, as it is not the focus in them; there is much more to tell. I don't think some duplication is a problem.

–LPfi (talk) 19:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm also not opposed to such an article but don't feel inspired like writing any major portions of it and I don't see much point in having a stub article of just a couple paragraphs. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I removed a sentence on R kiosks, as it ignored the Matkahuolto partners, which do provide ticket sale. Perhaps R kiosks providing ticket sale should be reinstated somewhere, but I didn't find a nice place and I don't know to what extent they do provide such service. Is it just that many R kiosks are Matkahuolto partners? Do all R kiosks provide it? Through a partnership with Matkahuolto, so that they provide the same service, or by their own agreements with a number of coach companies? The kiosks do sell most of VR's tickets, but that should be told in By train, not in By bus (and is told there). –LPfi (talk) 09:38, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

At least Onnibus tickets seem to be available purchased from R-kiosks, but it does not mention Matkahuolto tickets in general.

https://www.r-kioski.fi/palvelut/matkustaminen/ Kattimattinen (talk) 15:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

From that page it seems that the R chain has a general agreement with some companies. The chain does not sell coach or bus tickets in general, just HSL and Onnibus ones. HSL is handled in Helsinki – or should be, there are deficiencies at least for some regional traffic – and Onnibus tickets should be bought on the net. I assume you get the Onnibus tickets also from Matkahuolto partners, if needed. –LPfi (talk) 16:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

How many music festivals should we mention here, which ones are important? I admit that this is not an area of competence for me, but I have never heard about Kuopiorock, Nummirock, Qstock or Sauna Open Air, which now are mentioned as "some of the most notable festivals of popular music". If we remove three of those we come down to 7±2. –LPfi (talk) 06:24, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

We now say in Local transport that

"With Matkahuolto Routes and Tickets app you can find a right route with route planner and after it purchase the right ticket from the app for the route.

I don't have the app, but on the page Matkahuolto links to with the claim that

"Matkahuolto will provide you with an appropriate bus ticket for all your trips."

I found two services for today (line 709; an Ely-keskus service) between TYKS and Turku Cathedral, where buses travel more like a dozen an hour. I am suspicious whether the app will be able to give me the ticket to any of those other services.

We already link to the app in the general discussion before the subsection. I revert the addition for now, pending confirmation that one indeed can buy all local tickets with the app.

–LPfi (talk) 11:08, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

This page shows the list of local transport regions where the app sells tickets. Föli region is not yet included for some reason.

https://www.matkahuolto.fi/matkustajat/reitit-ja-liput-mobiilisovellus

~ 83.102.39.142 14:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

So let's us not pretend they cover all the country. I see 19 such "regions" (I don't think they are regions, rather transportation systems). I have no idea how many there are in Finland. I see no indication any part of Finland Proper, Western Uusimaa (except for HSL), the Ostrobothnias (except Kokkola) or Lapland (apart from Rovaniemi) would be covered. I'd say that means they cover only select parts of the country. –LPfi (talk) 16:40, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

For the fifth year in a row, Finland has been ranked the happiest country in the world. Should we note that on this page somewhere? (And perhaps in Nordic countries, I think the other ones also rank high. For a discussion on the topic, see e.g. Jan-Otto Andersson: Why is Finland the Happiest Country in the World? –LPfi (talk) 10:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'd say yes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:52, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'd also say yes to both mentioning it here and in Nordic countries. FWIW, the other four Nordic countries also have pretty high happiness ratings, enough to be mentioning in the subcontinental article. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Remember that this is subjective though. Some people will say that the happiest country in the world is actually Bhutan. The dog2 (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Which should be (and is, right?) mentioned in the Bhutan article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Also, this is the World Happiness Report 2022 by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. You can argue about how happiness was defined and measured, but here the subjective feeling of having a good situation has been measured uniformly across some 150 countries in a series of serious studies. Finland (like the Nordic countries in general) has long been at the top of several well-being indexes: first at "wealth and wellbeing" in 2009, first at "best opportunity to live a healthy, safe, reasonably prosperous, and upwardly mobile life" in 2010, the country with the least perceived corruption (if memory serves) in several years etc. Finland might not be the happiest country (suicide rate is still high, although it has decreased a lot in the last 30 years), but there is something that all these measures tend to catch. –LPfi (talk) 07:04, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The list of popular music festivals (festari) had grown to twelve, despite the HTML comment of "no more than ten". I moved out Tangomarkkinat and changed to "no more than nine" (why would this list be an exception, by one?), but two still need to be removed, which ones? The current list is:

• Sauna Open Air (Tampere). Early June. Heavy metal.
• Provinssirock (Seinäjoki). Mid-June. Rock.
• Nummirock (Nummijärvi, near Kauhajoki). Midsummer. Heavy metal.
• Raumanmeren juhannus (Pori). Midsummer. Pop/disco music.
• Tuska Open Air (Helsinki). Late June. Heavy metal.
• Ruisrock (Turku). July. Rock.
• Ilosaarirock (Joensuu). Mid-July. Rock, pop, reggae.
• Kuopiorock (Kuopio). Late-July. Heavy metal, rock, pop.
• Pori Jazz (Pori). Mid-July. Jazz and world music.
• Flow (Helsinki). Mid-August. Indie/electronic/urban.
• Qstock (Oulu). End of July. Rock, pop, rap

–LPfi (talk) 12:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

They can be listed in Nordic music. /Yvwv (talk) 12:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would favour moving all the music festivals be moved to Nordic music leaving only a brief summarised paragraph on this page. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am neutral on whether to move the listings, but I think the summary shouldn't be brief; instead there should be enough text here for people to understand what kind of events they are, apart from the musical experience. Perhaps one should also elaborate on the local amateurs vs. international stars dimension. I think a few paragraphs could be reasonable. –LPfi (talk) 13:23, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

There seems to be several festivals during Midsummer. Should those be suggested for travellers who aren't invited to a cottage over Midsummer? We should also point out some villages that have good traditional Midsummer events (I think Nagu has one, but much water has flowed under the bridges since I heard about it). Then there are those arranged by cities; I think Turku has one (in the city? at Saaronniemi?). What about Helsinki? –LPfi (talk) 13:33, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

The list is heavy (no pun intended) on rock/metal festivals so some of those could go. Even as those are the first thing that comes to my mind when hearing "music festival" in a Finnish context.

In Helsinki there's a low-key Midsummer festival with a bonfire at Seurasaari (Fölisön), mentioned in Helsinki#June. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Good (I had a faint memory of it being arranged). I think we might want to mention it here as an example. I wonder, should we expand the holidays section? We don't have much advice on where and how to celebrate the holidays. The Christmas season is explained quite well in Winter in the Nordic countries, but there is no place where the others are expanded on (Easter could use some additional content). Midsummer isn't even mentioned in Nordic countries! –LPfi (talk) 17:31, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, we could expend the Holidays section with some general tips, individual festivities are best added to the city articles.

The Nordic countries article doesn't seem to have a Holidays section to put Midsummer in (it's celebrated in the Baltic countries too, BTW). Maybe it there could be one with bigger holidays celebrated in one or several Nordic countries but not elsewhere (Midsummer, Lucia, Finland and Norway have fairly visible independence day celebrations...). Ypsilon (talk) 18:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I just reverted an edit saying that English is most widely spoken in big cities. I'd want that handled once and for all, or get my understanding challenged.

It is true in most places that people in cities know foreign languages better than in the countryside. For Finland, though, I doubt that's something worth mentioning. In the towns I know more than superficially, I would be surprised to find anyone born since the 1960s (except children) not to be more or less fluent in English. People learn the language in school, and at the same time by watching TV and using the internet. The language education is good enough – and the connection to the language in one's circle of friends close enough – that there is no steep barrier to move on to an international world from national chatrooms. Anybody studying at university (and that's half the population) will have some course literature in English, many will have workmates from abroad, and most people, academic or not, travel abroad, where English will be the language they use (unless they are fluent in the local language, which mostly is weaker than their English).

You might find some place where your communication in English will be severely restricted, and those might tend to be in small towns in the countryside, where few have an academic education and a foreigner is seldom seen. I could imagine that few of the people in the pub of Pelkosenniemi would speak English fluently (that might be my prejudice). However in towns or small cities like Pargas, Jakobstad and Lappeenranta, many people deal with foreigners in their professional roles, and a young person not knowing English would be kind of an outsider as they would be excluded from much of the popular culture.

–LPfi (talk) 10:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

As inspired by the work by a Finnish user editing from IPs (e.g. Special:Contributions/91.158.155.148) over the last few years, and my own thoughts from almost 7 years ago, I'm starting up articles for the remaining ~80 cities and municipalities that don't have one. Some are possibly better combined like in Turku countryside, or if a small municipality is right next to a larger city a redirect could work. They can always be split off as separate articles later. Aiming for usable status and at least 3000 bytes in size for each article. Ypsilon (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

A great project, Ypsilon. These contributions tend to go under the radar, but is just as useful as getting a major city to star status – I hope I'll be able to use this information when I visit Finland in two years time. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:33, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Nice. I think aiming at useful is good. We have quite some Finnish articles that are useful only to people passing by anyway, and for towns off thoroughfares such travellers are few. If there is enough substance to make some people visit the place, then everything above that is much more valuable. Thus priority could be given to places that have something of special interest or happen to be near some major sight or highway. Still, covering whole regions and eventually all the country would be very nice.

The main tourist destinations in Finland, I heard, are Helsinki, Lapland, the "archipelago" (the Archipelago Sea?) and the Lakeland (random order). Of these, the Lakeland has weak coverage, while all places along the Saimaa waterways could be visited by somebody renting a boat or a canoe (places with steamer access should be checked specifically), and similarly e.g. the Rautalampi Route (for which only Rautalampi has an article). A visitor could also rent a cottage in any municipality, and to cover the main sights and services there would be very useful for them. If we cover some such theme adequately, it can be made visible by links from the region and country articles (and topics such as Boating in Finland).

–LPfi (talk) 07:41, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@LPfi, Ypsilon: There are also 155 outline articles categorised under Finland (inc. Åland) – should we create a branch from Wikivoyage:Nordic countries Expedition specifically to improve Finnish articles? I'll be happy to join in and add more listings from online sources to these articles. We could also use the same page and do what I did on Wikivoyage:Australia Expedition to bring all articles categorised under New South Wales to usable (which was just keeping a personal track by changing the link every time). --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'd say Helsinki and Lapland are the two top places for visitors from further away (flying in). For people arriving by ferry also Turku with surroundings. Until COVID and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, also a great number of Russians mainly from St. Petersburg and surroundings used to hop across the border to places like Lappeenranta or Kotka. The rest of the country does of course also see international visitors (especially if they're driving), but the average guest, say, at a lakeside cottage or a small-town hotel would be domestic.

I'm planning to add them little by little, maybe a couple of these articles every day, starting with the municipalities that have city status. Didn't intend this as an expedition or anything, just thought I would add a note as to why I'm creating new articles with relatively little content, but of course everyone is welcome to help out. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing – in the meantime, I'll be adding listings to the many outline articles, starting with the city articles. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 20:55, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

DONE! Yay! Even though they're just barely usable (Get in, see, eat, sleep). But now they can be filled in little by little according to wikivoyagers' time and motivation, perhaps translate some content from Finnish Wikivoyage etc. I unified some smaller municipalities that were next to each other into rural areas, and redirected some that either had no place to sleep or are just a few kilometers from a nearby town. Ypsilon (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Onneksi olkoon! A great achievement! Ground Zero (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Nice – good progress, and one step closer for Finland to be a good-quality guide article. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 22:32, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Nice! For some of the combined municipalities, there is now little info on the smaller (or whatever) one. In some, checking their tourist site allows easily adding some listings. The {{mapframe}} parameters, the Understand, Get in and Get around also need some amendments, to really accommodate them. –LPfi (talk) 08:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Jpatokal: The sentence "However, water of fountains is usually not potable." was removed in a recent edit. In some (?) countries with hot weather, there are public fountains providing drinking water. In Finland, I haven't seen any outdoor fountains with this function; they are purely decorative and the water is often recycled, with whatever happens to end up in the basin. I am not sure how common fountains that could be mistaken for the former are, but I thought it is better to be safe than sorry. Was there some specific reason for the deletion? –LPfi (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

It seemed like a case of Captain Obvious to me: I wouldn't assume a decorative fountain anywhere is potable unless signposted as such, and even then it's usually an obvious tap etc, not the entire thing. Jpatokal (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

While I like the current banner's motif, I'm not in love with the unsharp/hazy objects + island in the background. Here are three other banners that I've cropped. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

As much as I love sunsets, the current banner could be anywhere. None of these says "Finland" to me, but I've only visited Helsinki. Visually, my choices would be, in order, 3, 2, 1, but I would defer to anyone with more knowledge of the country. Ground Zero (talk) 08:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I haven't been to Finland, either, but I think all these banners are good, including the current one. My somewhat ignorant ranking is 3, 2, 1, 0. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I kind of agree: the current banner's motif represents one aspect of Finland, but the actual banner doesn't tell much to somebody for whom the associations don't come automatically (a boat, probably by somebody's summer cottage, the famous lake Päijänne at Sysmä at sunset, which is loved also by Finns).

Banner 1 is a different but similar crop from the photo used as banner for Lapland. Banner two represents the Finnish lakes and islands in a way similar to the current banner, but without the (implied) cottage and the sunset. It is a very typical view for Finns spending their summer vacation. Banner 3 is from northern Lapland (in autumn, with Norway on the right side of the river); while Lapland is popular also among Finns, these are views you won't find in the south (as is the fell in banner 1, but otherwise such desolate places might be found also elsewhere).

All these are countryside and natural landscapes (with small hints of human presence, such as the boat and the building). While a view like banner 2 could be had from Helsinki or Tampere, they represent what you get when travelling farther. I think that's the experience we should try to convey, and mixing in urban elements would spoil it. Thus, a visitor to Helsinki won't recognise what they saw – and somebody from Canada probably could feel at home in the landscapes.

–LPfi (talk) 09:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'd defer to your local knowledge, but don't most people visit Finland for its nature? Also, I wouldn't want to have a banner of Helsinki similar to how I wouldn't want a banner of London for the United Kingdom (see my comment on Talk:United Kingdom), Toronto/Montreal for Canada or Sydney/Melbourne for Australia. But any other crop suggestions? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I think that most people visit Finland for its nature and that the nature is what we want to highlight. There are of course lots of people who visit just Helsinki, for work, on a cruise, because of the airport or, in good times, because of the railway from Russia, but that can be saved for the Helsinki banner. For this banner, I agree that those above are nice, and I don't have any other suggestions. I would like a lake photo, but it is very difficult to catch the impression; when I try I just get a lot of water in the picture (easier by painting, but I haven't done that for ages). –LPfi (talk) 11:05, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

(off-topic) Ooh, you used to paint lakes? That's cool and impressive! --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Not anything serious, but that were the landscapes I liked best – and we did have a seaside summer cottage (seems I match quite some Finnish stereotypes). –LPfi (talk) 11:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Banner 2 strongly reminds me of the view from the cottage I visit near Bobcaygeon. Ground Zero (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I used banner 0 for Sysmä. A relevant duplicate banner can be preferred before no banner. /Yvwv (talk) 15:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I actually like the current banner. Like LPfi said, if we decide to replace it, a banner with a lake in it would be best but IMO also coniferous forests would do. Mountainous landscapes one would find in (northern) Lapland do look impressive but they do not represent most of the country. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I prefer banner 1 because it has a bit of mountain & forest as well as just lake. Pashley (talk) 15:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, and I think the feeling of it represents something important for many Finns, something that can be shared by visitors. It is also good in that it wouldn't that easily be confused with Sweden and Norway (I assume they have similar landscapes, but not among the stereotypical ones).

It should not be too difficult to find another banner image for Lapland, if we decide to change the Finland banner and use that one.

–LPfi (talk) 06:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Banner 2 is by far my favorite. Banners 0 and 1 appear to have less clarity to me, while I'd have chosen banner 3 if not for the highway which (to my eyes) spoils the continuity of the landscape. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 17:06, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Since the beginning of this year, this article has grown by 15% in length, and it is now the longest country article in all of English Wikivoyage -- longer than our article for the U.S., China, India. It is great to have so much information for travellers, but the article's length makes that information less accessible to readers. Is it time to start transferring some information to other articles, creating travel topic articles for Finland, and trimming some of the lengthier passages to provide a more concise, livelier article? Ground Zero (talk) Ground Zero (talk) 13:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps. I assume there is some cruft that should simply be cut away, and some less relevant info, also best removed. It is hard for me to judge though.

I have long thought about cutting down the Stay safe and Stay healthy, but haven't really got to it. Also Get around is much too long, but I see less obviously unnecessary info there, except that By car could be left for Driving in Finland with only a paragraph or so here. The section on sauna is mostly identical with Sauna, and country-specific info could perhaps fit there, as the concept is so connected to this one country.

Skimming through the article now, I see many parts that could be condensed without loosing much, but also things that may or may not be obvious or general enough to be removed or moved to an international travel topic. The problem with the latter is that one needs foreign eyes to discern what exactly is obvious for an overseas foreigner.

–LPfi (talk) 13:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for doing some trimming.

Could the "unobvious rules" be moved to the Driving in Finland article?

The Eat section is very long. Is it time for a Finnish cuisine article? Or can some content be moved to Nordic cuisine?

Could the Learn section also be branched off to Studying in Finland?

Could the Work section be branched off to Working in Finland?

Branching off articles like these often leads to more content being added that contributors might hesitate to add to a national article, like example of universities that cater to foreign students.

Ground Zero (talk) 13:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Finland#Social dancing section is also very long for a pastime that will appeal to relatively foreign visitors. Can we move much of the text somewhere else? Ground Zero (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that we should move content from "Learn" and "Work" to separate articles. There is definitely enough content in those sections for standalone articles. I'd also guess (and correct me if I'm wrong here) that most tourists to Finland are not coming for work or study. Therefore, I'd consider this a rather separate, niche topic that could be covered separately from the mainstream of Nordic travel, which I think someone said on this website recently was primarily for the national parks and such. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 14:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, those topics could be moved to their own articles with just a paragraph or two here. The Eat section is indeed really long, so it, and the Drink section could certainly make up a Finnish cuisine article. Many of the rules related to studying and working are to my understanding common around the EU so maybe a Working in the European Union and Studying in the European Union (or just in Europe) would be better, those could be expanded with specifics for working and studying in other European countries. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I think:

• For driving, I already pruned the list. I think those I left are important for foreigners driving here, if they really are unobvious, which I don't know. One option is thinking that anybody that will drive here should read the Driving in article and leaving only stuff for choosing whether to drive.
• There seems to be enough content for a Cuisine article – most of that described is unique for Finland. Much of the section should still be kept here.
• There is no harm in creating specialised articles for Learn and Work. Those who might work or study should know that and click the link. While many rules are common for all EU (and probably Norway & co), I believe Russia (& co) is different. And there is a lot of national stuff, including nearly anything now included.
• There is Social dancing. Perhaps a section on Finland is acceptable; although it gets undue weight there, some could probably be generalised instead of writing similar sections on other regions.
• The outdoor life section is a bit unorganised, but I don't have a clear picture about what foreigners do. We now cater well (I hope) for those who visit national parks independently, more than expected for those (few?) going to some random wood to pick berries and enjoy their time there. Most foreigners coming for the nature probably do so on a package tour, and I don't know how to compete for that crowd.

–LPfi (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Good ideas. For "Eat," I suggest moving the individual menu items to Finnish cuisine while keeping the generalized information about customs within this article. From there, we can incorporate information to both articles as appropriate. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 20:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't be surprised if we reached a point where we had to branch of Finnish cuisine from Nordic cuisine. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 05:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think there is enough material for an independent cuisine article for Finland already: the content now in Finland#Eat and Finland#Drink is enough for that, and very little of it is common with the other Nordic countries. What's about Finland in Nordic cuisine is well and OK – we do share a lot – but that part isn't really in Finland#Eat now. –LPfi (talk) 08:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Moved over and restructured a bit, with a few additions. I cut down on some that became redundant in Finland, but some more should probably be removed. –LPfi (talk) 11:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wow, thank you! I would say that article is close to guide status. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 13:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

The article is improved, but it still has a lot of information that will be of interest only to a narrow group of readers. I have started Studying in Finland, which would benefit from attention from contributors who know more about the subject. I would note that our Studying in" articles are intended to ge about post-secondary education, as primary/secondary education is out of the scope of Wikivoyage. Ground Zero (talk) 12:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

At the beginning of this discussion I wrote:

"Branching off articles like these often leads to more content being added that contributors might hesitate to add to a national article, like example of universities that cater to foreign students."

In the 18 hours after I branched off the Studying in Finland article, its content was was expanded by 50%. Thanks to User:LPfi. Ground Zero (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply