Talk:Mexico Voyage Tips and guide

I'm very far from being an expert on tourism in Mexico, but wouldn't Chiapas better be placed in the Yucatán Peninsula? Part of it is geographically on the peninsula itself, so it's not a stretch. But more importantly, my understanding is that the tourism there is all about Mayan culture and ruins, placing it firmly in the Yucatán sphere, instead of the Pacific sphere. I'm about to map the region, so I'd like to get this figured out ;) --Peter ^Talk 05:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm just going to go ahead and do this while I make the map, since I don't really expect anyone else to comment. It fits my own road trip travel itinerary, so it certainly will work for me! --Peter ^Talk 20:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have now done this, and in the process learned a good deal more about travel in Chiapas. What I learned confirms my belief that it fits better in the Yucatán region. --Peter ^Talk 22:11, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

This section currently has a warning box that is dated 2011 and refers to events in 2010. There are also other warnings outside the box. Does this need an update? Should the warning box be removed? Current warnings added? Pashley (talk) 02:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

It is a US State department travel advisory, the link for which no longer exists. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I believe this is the latest warning. Powers ^(talk) 20:45, 11 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I shortened the following list in the drink section, mainly because it took up most of the screen to read and doesn't really provide much factual information (i.e. there is a beer that is 'fun to drink')

• Corona (popular, but not necessarily as overwhelmingly popular in Mexico as many foreigners think)
• Dos Equis (XX)
• Modelo Especial (medium lager)
• Negra Modelo (darker, flavorful ale)
• Modelo Light (typical light Mexican beer - Corona, Pacifico and Tecate also have "light" versions.
• Pacífico (Pilsner beer, one of the better lighter beers)
• Tecate (perhaps the most common beer, especially in the north, light with a slight hoppy taste)
• Indio (good amber, not commonly exported)
• Bohemia (nice malty taste)
• Carta Blanca (mass market beer)
• Sol (very light, similar to Corona)
• Superior (pretty common beer)
• Victoria (A light Vienna-style beer, usually not exported)
• Montejo
• León (red Vienna-style beer)
• Estrella
• Corona "de Barril" or Barrillito (fun to drink)
• Chamochelas
• Modelo Chope (Draft beer only available in select bars & restaurants, comes in Light & Negra varieties, with the latter being a Munich dunkel.)

I think it would be fine to add any of these back to the page if something substantial could be written about them. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Most of the content in the learn section is not travel relevant. I've rationalized it to the more relevant parts.

The original content can be seen below --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:07, 5 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The most important Universities in Mexico are as follows: UNAM, ranked 73rd worldwide, and the best in Latin America, which leads Mexico with 50% of Mexican scientific research, many of Mexico most illustrious people attended UNAM, including:

• 5 Mexican presidents,
• All of the Mexican Nobel Laureates: Alfonso García Robles (Peace), Octavio Paz (Literature), and Mario Molina (Chemistry)
• The World Wealthiest Person: Carlos Slim.

Its main campus is a UNESCO World Heritage site. Murals in the main campus were painted by some of the most recognized artists in Mexican history, such as Diego Rivera and David Alfaro Siqueiros.

IPN (Instituto Politecnico Nacional), a leading institution on engineering and architecture programs, it's a Polytechnical school and Most Mexico's technological creations can be attributed to IPN Alumni. ITESM (Instituto Tecnologico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey), located in Monterrey but with branch campuses in many other Mexican cities, too, it's a Private Research University. It surpassed IPN in some Engineering areas (Most notably Computer Science) some years ago and it's on par with UNAM. It has many exchange programs with universities across the world, and even double degree programs; Some of them include:

• Double degree with Carnegie-Mellon University in M.S. in Information Technology.
• Partnership with John Hopkins Medicine Program.
• Summer Programs at Georgetown University, UC Berkeley, Stanford, Cambridge and Yale.
• Double degree with UNC-Chapel Hill in M.B.A.
• Exchange programs with over 200 universities abroad around 30 countries.

Anahuac (Universidad Anahuac), a prestigious private institution sponsored by the Legion of Christ, which also belongs to the Anahuac University Network with campuses in Mexico, Chile, Spain, Italy and United Sates, and the Anahuac Educational Consortium, the elite elementary to high school institutions of the Semper Altius network and Oak Academies. The main Campus of the Anahuac University is located on Huixquilucan, Mexico State. Education is based in high leadership, entrepreneurism and above all, the Human Values. Alumni include some of the highest ranked executives and company presidents of Mexico and Latin America, including the Slim family. Ranks as the number one institution in Mexico on the Professional Classification of International Universities ranking by the Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris.

Ibero (Universidad Iberoamericana), is a Mexican private institution of higher education sponsored by the Society of Jesus. Its flagship campus is located in the Santa Fe district of Mexico City but there are others located in Guadalajara, León, Torreón, Puebla and Playas de Tijuana. among its alumni, is president Vicente Fox, Emilio Azcarraga Jean - President and Owner of Televisa the most important media network in Latin America, Carlos Guzmán Bofill - CEO of Hewlett-Packard México, Daniel Servitje - President and CEO of Bimbo, Guillermo Arriaga - Film screenwriter, Novelist, and Director (Amores Perros, 21 Grams and Babel), Alejandro González Iñárritu - Filmmaker (Amores Perros, 21 Grams and Babel).

ITAM (Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México) is by far one of the best universities in Mexico. Founded by the businessman Raúl Baillères in 1946, it has a very specific focus in the Economics sector. With 14 programs, it has been awarded by several sources as having the best programs in Business Administration, Actuarial Science, Economics, International Relations and Public Accounting. It has the best MBA program in Latin America as well as the best Economics PhD in Mexico. Many public figures and government functionaries come from this prestigious university.

For graduate degrees and executive preparation:

The IPADE Business school currently ranks as the world's 7th best MBA programs outside the US, and the only one in Latin America, according to Forbes.

The EGADE Master Business School in Monterrey is ranked No.68 of MBA schools worldwide, the first in Latin America For many years it was considered a school exclusive for Affluent people, it aggressively seeks to open its doors to talented minds of all income levels through an amazingly rich scholarship program, funded by the periodic raffles of multi-million dollar, fully furnished mansions along with luxury cars and a big sum of money.

If one had to Compare them with American Universities:

• UNAM would be the "Harvard" of Mexico, devoted to Humanities, Medicine and Law schools, as far as the reach of the institution but not as exclusive.
• Anahuac would be like the "Princeton" of Mexico, home to both the wealthy and low profile elites, figuring in international rankings and with a great prestige result of its alumni, international programs and social awareness.
• IBERO would be the "Yale" of Mexico, a private school, with amazing resources constantly ranking amongst the best in Latin America, and ranked as one of the best private universities in Mexico.
• IPN, a school devoted to engineering and sciences, with many of its students developing patents, could be considered a school like "MIT", and in fact, they've won many competitions against them.
• ITESM is located in a city with many industrial companies, the Alma mater of many entrepreneurs, with decent computer and engineering programs, regarded as an good private university, and with a business-oriented curriculum, somewhat similar to Stanford.
• UDLAP The Universidad the las Americas at Puebla, would be the "Cornell-U" of Mexico.
• ITAM The Instituto tecnológico Autonomo de Mexico would be the "Columbia" of Mexico
• ULSA The Universidad La Salle would be the "Darthmouth College" of Mexico

Most of the government funded universities on mayor cities (state capital) have short courses on history, gastronomy and cultural subjects, most of them are almost free. Other places are the "Casa de la Cultura", (house of culture) this are historical buildings used for cultural related activities (music concerts, theater, paint and other exhibits, they also have "talleres" (workshops).

Most of them have programs for foreigners. Foreigners can take a course to learn Spanish, or even study a whole career. Also, there are some other courses where you can learn traditional Mexican activities such as handcrafts. The tuition at a public school is rarely over $200USD. Many excellent private universities exist in the larger cities (Mexico City, Guadalajara, Monterrey, etc.) and provide good education.

There are Spanish language schools throughout Mexico. The city with the most schools is Cuernavaca, with more than 50 schools. Oaxaca, San Miguel de Allende and Guanajuato also offer a number of schools to choose from. Prices vary; however, most schools are very reasonably priced. Many schools can arrange homestays with local Mexican families.

Currently we have an empty headline about the Mexican revolution. I think it is tremendously important, but I don't know all that much apart from the fact that some guy named Pancho Villa and some guy named Zapato were involved and most of them had mustaches. Oh... and at some point the US tried to intervene. Or something. Could anybody with knowledge please write sth. on that era? Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:08, 10 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's only taken eight years to get around to this, but I've created a new article Mexican Revolution to fill this gap. It explains events of the time, major battle, major personalities, and identifies destinations where travelers can see and learn more. I'd welcome any additions or comments from folks who are knowledgable about the topic. Mrkstvns (talk) 16:44, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

As I mentioned on Wikivoyage:requested articles, the bus network in Mexico is probably one of the most extensive and "full service" in the world. Furthermore the get around by bus section is slowly but surely getting rather long. For a general idea how to spin off a section like that see the most recent effort at air travel in the US. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

The map is now five years old. Has the security situation significantly improved / deteriorated? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

The information is rather out of date, as is the map. I know nothing about producing maps; however when I have time I can take a stab at updating some of the safety information. –StellarD (talk) 23:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

That'd be great. Maybe there is also some newer map in the relevant WP article? Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

First of I am not a native speaker of Spanish and I have only been to Mexico for a handful of weeks, so it may well be that I lack the sufficient background, but in light of this edit I have to ask whether "barrio" has any connotations of being a bad neighborhood and if so whether they only exist in certain Spanish dialects or in American (mis)understanding of Spanish. If "barrio" indeed has negative connotations in English but not in Spanish, I don't think we should use it here without specifying its neutral nature in Spanish. Can anybody with more knowledge on this please weigh in? Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

At least not in Spanish Spanish or Rioplatense, I'm pretty sure (says a gringo who knows enough Spanish to order food at a restaurant or buy bus tickets ;)). However there are, as you know, fairly large differences between Spanish spoken on different continents so it's not impossible that "barrio" would have negative connotations in Mexico or elsewhere. User:StellarD maybe would have some idea? ϒpsilon (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

My understanding is that in Mexico a barrio is simply a neighborhood, often working or lower middle class, and that a barrio is not necessarily a slum. The somewhat negative connotation for English speakers likely comes from barrios in such places as Los Angeles, which have been historically associated with gang activity and other societal ills (which of course are not exclusive to Latin American neighborhoods). Even so, I think that connotation is not universal even in the US, as in some cities, like Tucson, barrios have been rehabilitated or restored, and are visited by tourists and diners looking for great Mexican restaurants.

Generally though I think the advice in the edit is sound – as a gringo or outsider it is definitely not advisable to enter the slums without a trusted local guide who knows the community. I would remove 'barrio' from the sentence and rephrase it to read: 'If you wish to visit one of the slums, you should only go as part of a guided tour with a reputable guide or tour company.' –StellarD (talk) 08:12, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Going to disagree. Slums may sometimes be dangerous but not always. Some slums may well be safer than other neighborhoods that are not so disadvantaged. Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, not all slums are dangerous. However, slums in Mexico can be very dangerous, and it can be very difficult for a nonresident to identify which are dangerous and which are not. Having personally been the victim of an armed robbery and attempted kidnapping in an area which was supposedly safe (in Oaxaca (city)), in broad daylight, near a slum, and having heard many many similar such stories from other cities in Mexico, it is definitely inadvisable for a gringo to simply wander off into any neighborhood which s/he finds interesting. Mexico City, Monterrey, Oaxaca, Acapulco, Mérida, etc. – these places are not like London or Singapore. Mexico is not only in the grips of horrible cartel wars, there is also a surge in drug use (in the slums) and intense poverty. A visitor walking into such an environment is a sitting duck, asking to be robbed and/or kidnapped. –StellarD (talk) 07:03, 5 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

So, I noticed this article is rated as an outline, but isn't it a bit more, you know, comprehensive? Sorry, I'm not that familiar with Wikivoyage. MediaKill13 (talk) 09:08, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

No worries, this aspect of WV is confusing :) The rules are found under Wikivoyage:Country_guide_status , and if you think that Mexico deserves a higher rating then just go ahead and suggest it here. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Actually, according to the rules Andrew just linked to, it's not enough that the Mexico article itself is comprehensive. Also all articles listed under the Mexico#Cities and Mexico#Other destinations need to be at least usable. By the way, per 7 2, a few "Other destinations" should be removed from the list, the maximum number allowed is nine. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:23, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

There is a discussion about this at Wikivoyage_talk:Currency#Mexican_pesos Ground Zero (talk) 13:47, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Embassy of Mexico in UAE confirmed me "If one irrespective of any nationality have a valid USA, Schengen , Japan, Canada, UK, North Ireland valid visa holder, there is no need to apply for a Mexican visa. I think this is really informative and should be added to this article. I am myself going to try since I don't have Mexican visa but I carry valid Japanese visa in my Pakistani passport. --Saqib (talk) 12:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

I do think this is valid information and while you are at it, the visa information in many get in sections is liable to be outdated... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:49, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

An unregistered editor has pointed out that Chiapas doesn't belong in the Yucatan Peninsula region. The Wikipedia article shows where the peninsula is, and it clearly doesn't include Chiapas or Villahermosa. After considering proposing to move it, I think it would make more sense to rename the region.

I've looked at other regional maps of Mexico, and it seems like there is no standard regional division of the country. Even the Tourism agency doesn't seem to use regions in its marketing. So we are on our own here. While Chiapas could be moved to Pacific Coast, Villahermosa really doesn't fit anywhere.

The region we have now has five states, which is a reasonable number -- moving two states out would make this region small.

If we rename the existing region instead of breaking it up, we would need to find a name:

• Yucatan and Chiapas - descriptive, but Tabasco state isn't part of either
• Yucatan, Chiapas and Tabasco - too long, I think
• Southern Mexico - boring, but does the trick

Other ideas? Ground Zero (talk) 12:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

How about Mexican Central America? It's a distinction used by Lonely Planet for which parts of Mexico to include in its "Central America on a shoestring" guide that has sent countless gringos on "Central America in two weeks" trips. And the border between "North America proper" and Central America in the geological sense is the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, which is thereabouts, right? Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

My immediate thought was Southern Mexico, but that's not really accurate (Cancún is further north than many states, including almost all of Central Mexico). In my mind and maybe it's just me, Chiapas regionally belongs with Oaxaca more than it does with any other state. Looking at the Spanish Wikiviajes article, Chiapas is with Oaxaca and Guerrero in Southwestern Mexico, which makes sense to me. Irn (talk) 15:04, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Lonely Planet's Mexico guide puts Chiapas and Tabasco together in a chapter - there is no "Mexican Central America" chapter. Googling that phrase came up with no significant hits, so I don't think that's a good solution.

Wikiviajes would be a good model to follow, but it uses more regions, and would require a thorough restructuring of our Mexico articles, which would be a lot of work. I don't think it's the best use of our time. Renaming this region would be quick and easy. Maybe we should go with Yucatan, Chiapas and Tabasco and be done with it. Ground Zero (talk) 14:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I am not talking about the subdivision LP uses for its Mexico Guide, I am talking about its "Central America on a shoestring" guide, which includes part but not all of Mexico. And why would you call "Mexican Central America" a bad term? It is, geographically speaking, the part of the geological region "Central America" currently governed by the United Mexican States. Of course Central America is often understood to exclude Mexico, but that has historical and cultural reasons, not geological or geographical ones. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:58, 18 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I didn't call it a bad term. I don't think it's a good solution because it is a term that isn't used by anyone beyond one book published by another travel guide publisher. I assume they use it in their Central America guide to justify including those states in that guide. I don't think following what LP does is appropriate for Wikivoyage. If it were used by others, I'd be okay with it, but I couldn't find it bring used elsewhere.Ground Zero (talk) 00:49, 19 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

"Yucatan, Tabasco, and Chiapas" could work, but it's misleading because it's not in parallel form. (Yucatan refers to the peninsula and not the state, but the other two are states.) It would have to be "Yucatan Peninsula plus Tabasco and Chiapas" (or something like that), which is clunky. I'm not very familiar with Wikivoyage, and especially its style, but I see nothing wrong with the fact that few or no other sources use "Mexican Central America". Is there a policy/guideline in that regard? As for restructuring in the style of Wikiviajes, if the only concern is that it's too much work/time, I should have the time to do that over the course of the next week or so, and I wouldn't mind taking that on. -- Irn (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

As it looks like no-one is willing to take on the task of restructuring the region's along the lines of Wikiviajes, I think we should revisit this

Our mis-named Yucatan Peninsula region covers what Wikiviajes calls Southeast Mexico and Chiapas state. I think on this basis, we should rename our region Southern Mexico. The fact that Cancún is further north than many states, including almost all of Central Mexico, does not seem to bother our Hispanophone colleagues at Wikiviajes, so I don't think it should bother us. Ground Zero (talk) 23:32, 1 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

But they define Southern Mexico differently than we do; their "Southwestern Mexico" extends to the state of Guerrero. I think without a change in districting, we could call this "Yucatan and the South", but not "Southern Mexico". Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

The problem with changing regions is not just the breadcrumb hierarchy, but also updating the maps, since there are nowadays few people on Wikivoyage who do the task. I would say, though, that we should look to Spanish Wikivoyage for the best information on Spanish speaking places. We could ask them, perhaps. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:28, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Ikan Kekek: they don't define a Southern Mexico, though. I'm okay with "Yucatan and the South" if if means we can fix the error that we have now.

SelfieCity: good point. I don't have the skills to update maps. Ground Zero (talk) 02:09, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I just think that's a more logical name for this region if we keep it as is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have made a static map in the past, but generally I find it extremely time-consuming. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I've made this change. I hope that no one thinks I was too hasty in making this change because the discussion was only open for 15 months. Ground Zero (talk) 03:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Check out the quickbar at Mexico#Understand, according to that, Mexico's capital nowadays apparently involves someone's sister. What's more the link does bring you to Mexico City.

The data to the quickbar is to my understanding automatically sourced from Wikidata, but I'm unable to find that passage in the Wikidata file for Mexico, plus the capital parameter there accurately says Mexico City.

Do we have someone onboard familiar with Wikidata who could help? -- ϒψιλον (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

The vandalism was reverted four minutes after it was added. Just needed to do a cache purge here. ARR8 (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

My recollection is that the 24-hour clock is used. Any other opinions? Ground Zero (talk) 03:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Does anyone else think that we could do so much better for Mexico than this page banner? Ground Zero (talk) 14:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here is one alternative, that is not already in use elsewhere. Ground Zero (talk) 14:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here's an approximate mockup. Looks more enticing than the bridge.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The current banner is pretty and should be used somewhere, but hell, yes on the substitution suggestion! Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The current banner is of the Mezcala Bridge in Guerrero state. The Guerrero banner is a beautiful one, but I think I've seen that sunset before on a different tropical coast. Well, on just about every tropical coast I've visited. I would move that banner to Guerrero. Ground Zero (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The current Guerrero banner is a sunset at Zihuatanejo, whose current banner is okay, but we could consider the sunset banner there instead of the black-and-white banner. Ground Zero (talk) 18:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here's to serial demotions🍹🇲🇽 --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Banner 2 says "México" to me more than the current one does. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Banner updated. Ground Zero (talk) 11:06, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

what fits better? usable or guide status? Flightnavigator (talk) 18:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

It has more than enough content to be guide status, but it could use some serious clean-up work and some of the regional articles and state articles below it in the hierarchy are still rather sparse. Mrkstvns (talk) 16:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Monterrey montage.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's a montage and we can't use it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:42, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Someone added a paragraph about a total solar eclipse that will happen in 2024. It's also been added to quite a few destination pages. This seems irrelevant for a travel guide, or at least of extremely limited utility. I was thinking of removing it, but perhaps some of you find it interesting or useful. Thoughts? Mrkstvns (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is so much to see in Mexico that I don't think a one-time event lasting a few minutes should be in the country article. Ground Zero (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Definitely not one of the most important things to see in Mexico. I strongly support removing that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 08:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Mrkstvns, Ground Zero: Given the lack of further comment, I've reverted the edit. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:39, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

This is not reasonable and I've un-reverted. Totality covers a large tract of NW Mexico and it will have the best viewing chances. As the objection applies to all solar eclipses not just this one, I suggest we discuss on that talk page. Grahamsands (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Can you please explain how it's unreasonable? There was a 100% support as of 00:39 September 26 for removing it and until you butted in and objected it without a compelling argument against Ground Zero and Mrkstvns's arguments, then... SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:32, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

If it covers northwestern Mexico, then the listing should be in the region/state articles for northwestern Mexico, and not in the national article. And @Grahamsands:, not accepting the views of other editors is disruptive behaviour. You should have re-opened the discussion and to see if other editors agree with you before reverting. Reverting over the will of other editors is not collaborative. Ground Zero (talk) 15:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. Also to Grahamsands, regarding "as the objection applies to all solar eclipses not just this one, I suggest we discuss on that talk page", no, not exactly – whether to include a solar eclipse in an article is a case-by-case basis. Don't get me wrong, I'm an astronomy buff who's fascinated by solar eclipses, but this is way too fine-grained to go in a country article. As you say, this specific eclipse can only be seen from northwest Mexico, so it should only be mentioned in the relevant state articles (namely Sonora and Baja California). Stubbornly reverting other users' edits is not a constrictive way to move forward. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

And look what I found: a mention of the solar eclipse in Northern Mexico#Do. Grahamsands... SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:52, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've now posted a starter for discussion on Solar Eclipses talk page, and apologies that I was not able to do so earlier. (As the trail shows, I hadn't been alerted to your discussion, and feel I was the one first reverted against.) The point is that there have been debates like this on other city pages, so it would be helpful to agree the principles in one place, within which to consider case by case. This one is about how far along the breadcrumb to mention the event, and the criterion suggested is impact on travel. I took the view that this event could impact on the whole of Mexico, for instance by travel congestion through Mex City. You might argue not, if for instance few will travel to such a crime-wracked region, or would route via the USA. Grahamsands (talk) 09:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The 'colectivo' transportation seems to pop up in articles about Mexico. Is it a concept known throughout the country? In that case it should be described in this article's Get around, instead of in individual city articles, or even listings, and used without explanation in others. –LPfi (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, colectivos are common in Mexico. They go by many names, including 'combis' and 'peseros'. They were described in this article's Get around section as "city buses" (a term I've never actually heard used to refer to them). I've changed the heading to "City buses / colectivos" and tried to clarify the language in it. In individual cities where colectivos are popular, I would suggest providing some info on popular routes (e.g., "along Av. Constitucion from the main plaza to WalMart from 08:00 - 18:00 for 5 pesos"). Mrkstvns (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Re-reading it, I find it confusing so re-wrote it, separating info about City buses (such as Metrobus routes) from info about colectivos. I think it's better now but would appreciate having y'all review it and make any corrections/clarifications. Mrkstvns (talk) 18:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I reverted an edit by someone (unregistered IP) who felt that the warning on visiting Mexico was no longer necessary, among other views. Because warnings on visiting Mexico still exist (see Canada and United States for example), I believe the warning box should remain as there is a vital risk to traveler safety. Wanted to ask editors for their opinions on this. JRHorse (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

• I strongly agree with reverting the deletion of warnings. These are valid warnings. Ground Zero (talk) 02:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think reverting the warnings needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis. I do agree with JRHorse's decision to revert in this case because the incident in question is fairly recent, however, putting the warnings in place solely as a reaction to a recent media report is not useful in the long term. I would like to see some kind of guidance as to how long such a warning is relevant. This sunsetting guidance should not be based solely on official warnings such as those from the U.S. State Department, because those tend to be allowed to stagnate forever. For incidents that get media attention, like shootings of tourists, mass shootings, etc., I think a 6-month warning period might be warranted. What do y'all think? Also, does somebody know how to tag the safety warnings in such a way as to remove them after some period? It sometimes seems like the warnings are quick to get put in place, but not so quick to get removed when they become obsolete. Be nice to make them easy to maintain.

Just to be clear: we're talking about the advisory at the top of the page, not the more detailed (and generally more useful) Stay safe section. Mrkstvns (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

It might be more accurate and useful to change the word "most" in the warning to "some". The U.S. State Department guidance identifies 6 states with chronic safety issues related to drug cartel violence (and Tamaulipas, where the March shooting occurred, is one of them). "Most" of Mexico (the other 26 states) is quite safe for tourists, though of course, crime is never completely eliminated. Security is very good in most tourist areas (like beach resorts and Central Mexico). Mrkstvns (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

If there is a government warning about a place, it makes sense to include it. But I agree thst a lot of safety warnings are added because of a one-time event, and then lie there to rot away. It would be useful to be able to put a expiry date on such warnings so that they would be automatically removed, but that's probably adking too much. I went through all if the warning a while ago and removed a bunch of them, but it was tedious, and I may not do it again. Ground Zero (talk) 14:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I get frustrated when I see articles with embarrasingly outdated safety advisories. Kudos to Ground Zero for making the effort to stamp them out, but I can understand how thankless the job might be. I promise to be a little more proactive in removing them when I see them, but won't make any promises around systematically seeking 'em out. I'm much to lazy for that! ;-) Mrkstvns (talk) 14:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps at some point the warning notice can be rephrased accordingly. I agree with @Ground Zero; if there are warnings that potentially affect traveler safety, they should be noted at the head of the article. JRHorse (talk) 15:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I left a larger response below, but in regards to this comment my main issue is granularity. Mexico has a highly diverse security situation. If there is a warning for a specific state that should exist on top of the state's page, not on top of the country's page. Jamespfennell (talk) 16:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm the person who removed the warnings. I feel a top-of-page warning is completely disproportionate. The reason I removed the warning is because I feel it isn't reasonable and is possibly based on biases about Mexico that exist in the US (where I live). Mexico is a huge country of 100+ million people. The murder of 2 US of citizens months ago is something that can be mentioned in the "stay safe" section, but does not merit a top-of-page warning. If we are going to add such a warning to the Mexico page, should we add a similar top-of-page warning to the US page, in light of the frequent mass shootings here? If not, why? Why is Mexico being subject to special treatment? Jamespfennell

I'm going to give a more clear-headed argument for why this warning should be removed, and then disengage and let others decide. My previous interactions may have been too hot - sorry!

First, the safety situation in Mexico is highly diverse and region specific. Some states like Tamaulipas, where the shooting happened, have the same advisory level as Venezuela; others, like the states around Mexico City, have the same level as Italy. Creating a warning on the top of the _country_ page seems inaccurate and misleading in this context. This is especially true because most tourists aren't going to the very dangerous areas.

Second, the Mexico-US border zone is dangerous and warnings on top of articles about, say, Ciudad Juarez, are probably warranted. However even within this context, the shooting in Matamoros was highly unusual and probably isolated. In the aftermath of the shooting the cartel issued an "apology" and handed over 5 of their members to the police. This is not an incident that is likely to be repeated.

Finally, the reason I am commenting here is because the security situation in Mexico is basically a politicized issue in the US. I think it's a place where US-based folks like myself may be bringing our biases into play. This is why I mentioned the frequent shootings in the US: no one would put a US travel advisory based on those, but after one isolated incident in one of the most dangerous places in Mexico, suddenly the country's page has a top-of-page warning. It seems completely detached from the reality of visiting Mexico (which I did in March btw).

I'm going to disengage now, but I do ask that if the warning stays it needs to have a deadline (number of months after the shooting?). I think the warning itself is not warranted, but a permanent country-level warning for one incident in a one of the most dangerous parts of Mexico is definitely strange. Jamespfennell (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello Jamespfennel. You raise some valid points, though this isn't really the place to talk about whether the United States should have a safety advisory --- it probably should due to continuing problems of gun violence (10 times Canada's rate and 100 times Britain's) as well as chronic issues around racially motivated hate crimes. I suggest discussing this in the Discussion page for United States rather than here. Mrkstvns (talk) 15:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

To be clear, I'm not advocating that a safety advisory be added to the US page. I'm just pointing out that Mexico is being subject to special treatment here. Jamespfennell (talk) 15:38, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

There's already a warning box in Stay safe mentioning that there are high levels of crime and drug-related violence in certain states, do we need an additional one at the top of the article? Recently someone randomly shot at people and cars at a rally in Baja California (something that made it into the news even in Finland) and the news reports lets you understand that it might have something to do with criminals fighting each other, but still... Ypsilon (talk) 16:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

My feeling is that travel warnings from reasonably reputable official sources, should be mentioned, and that "Stay safe" is the section where some of the differences between different parts of the country and practical differences from some of the language in travel warnings is laid out. As for the U.S., the same standard should apply. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Ikan. Too many people seem to turn a blind eye toward the constant violence in the U.S. Whether it be from mass shootings, racial intolerance, or even police shooting at "bad guys" like they were wild west gunslingers. Several countries have issued travel warnings against the U.S. and I think it is entirely appropriate that if we are talking about warnings for Mexico, we also talk about similar warnings for U.S. travel. Mrkstvns (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

FWIW, per Template:Warningbox#Article placement, "If the danger is localized or avoidable, place it under "Stay safe"." After having a quick look at the travel advisories, I think "Stay safe" is where the warningbox belongs. Vidimian (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

That's OK with me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Proposing the following wording at the top of the article, either as a warning or caution box: "Mutliple governments warn against non-essential travel to certain parts of Mexico (or certain states in Mexico) due to high levels of criminal activity, including drug-related violence and kidnappings. See stay safe for more information."

Other international advisories recommending against non-essential travel can be added. JRHorse (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Oppose because it is overstating the risk. (Although I like that you've cut the bit about one specific shooting---a more general warning is better, particularly since incidents in the past 2-3 years occurred in other states as well). I think a more accurate statement might be:

"Visitors should exercise increased caution in certain areas of Mexico due to ongoing problems of drug cartel violence. See stay safe for more information." Mrkstvns (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

If drug cartel violence would be a better way to phrase it than criminal activity, then I'll support. JRHorse (talk) 17:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think a short, straight-to-the-point statement has more credibility and is more suited for a country-level page. Mrkstvns (talk) 17:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, my question was whether 'drug cartel violence ' should be preferred over 'criminal activity' in the message. JRHorse (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Saying that "several governments warn against non-essential travel to some states" is a factual statement. I trust the views of various governments over those of a few Wikivoyagers, no offence intended. I agree that refernce to a specific incident does not belong in the warning box. Ground Zero (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have add links for the UK, Canada and Australian government warnings, which essentially say this. Ground Zero (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Don't you think the mention of several warnings is better left to the "Stay safe" section? That way the warning itself isn't full of fluff. Just a suggestion... Mrkstvns (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think that several governments warning their citizens about travelling is the most important thing. The UK Home Office, Global Affairs Canada, and the Aussie Department of Foreign Affairs have far better information about what is happening in Mexico than we do. Ground Zero (talk) 22:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose a warning box at the top per Mrkstvns, support a warning box in "Stay safe". If this is specific to some states, it does not need to go at the very top of an article and can go in the "Stay safe" section instead. The states that do have such an issue (Colima, Guerrero, Michoacan, Sinaloa, Tamaulipas and Zacatecas per the US govt) should have warning boxes at the top. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I don't know how to please everyone, but it's been about a week since anyone commented on this discussion, so I'm taking a stab at updating the safety info. I agree with Ground Zero that warnings from other governments are important, and they are added to the existing U.S. warning in the Stay Safe section. On reconsideration, I think SHB2000 is right, that the warning box at the top is unnecessary. I've removed it and would prefer that additional safety concerns be addressed in the Stay Safe section, when appropriate, but that we refrain from reacting to sensationalist media stories. Thanks all for your comments! Mrkstvns (talk) 20:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

On reflection, I agree that warnings that apply to only parts of the country should go under Stay Safe instead of at the top of the article. Ground Zero (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I just did the money exchange at the CUN airport and only got 15 pesos to the dollar and then got to Playa del Carmen and saw the money exchange rate there was 17 to the dollar. I'm not so sure that it's best to exchange at the airport as advised here. Lazarus1255 (talk) 04:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Did you do the exchange after the customs, as the article advises? If so, we should probably change the text. –LPfi (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

It was like 30 steps past the customs, right after I had passed through the passport scanning process, and on the same (the 2nd) floor. But upon my departure yesterday, I did notice a different money exchange on the ground level adjacent to the check-in or ticketing counters with a far more agreeable exchange rate, so I guess the Wikivoyage information is accurate after all, thanks. Lazarus1255 (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, there's a lot of inaccurate and outdated info in the Buy section. It could use a careful review and update. Mrkstvns (talk) 17:50, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply