Talk:Nara Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

In the "Buy" Section: There is no pottery known as "Wakakusayaki" as a general naming. Verification needed. "Nara Family" used to be one of the largest of its kind when built in the '70s but not so sure at present. At any rate, it is a kind of shopping mall rather for local habitants than for travellers.

Duly noted. And yes, all my Google hits for 若草焼き seem to get recipes for grilled fish, not pottery... (WT-en) Jpatokal 20:46, 4 February 2007 (EST)

To-Do's (hopefully someday) - enriching contents for destinations outside Nara City.

Some thoughts: citing Asuka as the first and Fujiwarakyo the second capitals of Japan may not be really fitting. For one reason (but not limited to), it is because the palaces during these ages are believed to have moved, each time the Emperor changed, in the contemporary Asuka Village and maybe even surrounding areas. What generally is not disputed are: - Asuka area having been once the land of Imperial homegrounds for about 1oo years. - Fujiwarakyo: the first, large-scale palace and city modeled after Changan of Tang. Although it may be of less importance to name what is the "first and second" in the Wikivoyage context, leaving the notations as is may be somewhat misleading. Therefore my suggested alternatives: "Asuka - the homeground of very ancient capitals of Japan", "Fujiwarakyo - the first "permanent" capital palace."

Edit note Feb 7: 1. Order changed in the WH list, so as to group them a little better geographically, or area wise than just sticking to the official WH listing, hopefully to benefit potential visitors. 2. Naramachi: some grouping of the scattered text may be appropriate some time in the future. 3. Some ideas for Buy - souvenir: 筆,墨, 晒 (布製品), 一刀彫　--- this is a forget-nots for myself. 4. Some reflection point: is it appropriate to add some more description on the history of Nara; notably the temples and shrines are of ancient ages, while Naramachi and the merchandise (souvenirs) are from later age developments like Edo --- this may become self explanatory as Naramachi description grows. --(WT-en) 60dot 07:38, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Plunge forward! You're doing a great job so far. Wikivoyage tends to prefer alphabetical listings though, but why not try writing an itinerary if you want to take the traveller on a tour in a certain order? (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:17, 7 February 2007 (EST)

I totally agree that the listing be reverted to alphabetical order, sometime in the future when the contents of individual attractions gets richer than just a listing --- which is still far, far away. Having an itinerary is a great idea, too --- and, phew, probably yet even further way. --(WT-en) 60dot 20:24, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Edit note Feb 8: Moved former "Understand" to the top, to somewhat meet the looks and feel as in Osaka or Kyoto pages. Added new text as a very brief backgrounder instead. (WT-en) 60dot 04:07, 8 February 2007 (EST)

I think the itineraries should be listed in sub-sections under "see", as opposed to having their own articles, unless you're envisioning them being gigantic... (WT-en) ::: Cacahuate 21:18, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Noted. These pages for now were created intentionally, to serve a kick-start drafting and to

separate them from the "see" section so that the draft won't interfere much the existing description there. Whenever these reaches a reasonably readable state, they should go back in the "see" section. (WT-en) 60dot 23:20, 8 February 2007 (EST)

I have to disagree with Cacahuate here -- they should fleshed out and placed on separate pages. See One day in Bangkok or Three days in Singapore for a few examples of full city itineraries. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:42, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Appreciate the comments from both of you guys. Where these will eventually go should become clearer over time, seeing how much I, or any other contibutor of course, can enrich these itineraries. The reason I've created them separate for the timebeing is stated above. (WT-en) 60dot 00:04, 9 February 2007 (EST)

To my mind, one of the great pleasures of Nara is how one can show up and have an enriching walk around Nara Koen without much advance planning - one simply comes across the major sights, since the place is so well sign-posted, and half the attraction is the lovely atmosphere anyway. For itineraries, I'd suggest playing off the idea (mentioned in the introduction) that Nara can be a base for exploration of the area - anyone can figure out how to spend a productive day in Nara city on their own, but you could use the itinerary to show how they might spend a second day at Horyu-ji and other south-western sights, a third day in Uji, etc. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 07:54, 9 February 2007 (EST)

I started Three days in Nara along those lines, using some of (WT-en) 60dot's information - please join in. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:17, 15 February 2007 (EST)

Re: Writing Brush 筆

What I tried to mean with this: therefore not all you see at shopfronts are necessarily of artisanal works.

is twofold. 1. Many brushes are made by Nara local artisans indeed, but the products are not always the same, notably in terms of materials - what type of animal hair is used in the brush part - as the "traditional" Narafude. Authentic Narafude is rare. 2. With respect to quality of Chinese products, many are imported and sold.

Any better way to say so without getting too lengthy? (WT-en) 60dot 21:45, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Maybe something like "Authentic brushes (narafude) are rare, and accordingly, expensive. The difference is in the type of animal hair used for the brush part. Cheaper brushes made from other materials may be available." (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 22:22, 12 February 2007 (EST)

I've amended the text accordingly. Take a look, and please change if you feel I have not fully expressed your meaning or if you can do so more succinctly. (WT-en) WindHorse 22:36, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Thanks guys: modified just a little. Taken away "cheap", because imports from China are yes, less expensive, but with superb quality --- exactly what people dropping into those specialized shops are looking for. (WT-en) 60dot 22:50, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Great. We got there. (WT-en) WindHorse 22:51, 12 February 2007 (EST)

I think it would be helpful to visitors if we organized the sights in sections for ones that are in Nara Koen and ones that aren't, like Yakushi-ji. My memory is faulty for geography (and I haven't been to the latter four temples currently listed under Historic Monuments), though, so I'd have to defer to someone else on this. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 02:19, 13 February 2007 (EST)

I totally agree that it'd be very useful. When I scratched those dirty itinerary stubs, grouping was taken into account. That's not at all to say that there has to be a rigid itinerary on separate sheets, I just thought at least some grouping would be nice to let a visitor pick up and choose the places he/she wants to see in certain area. (Well, obviously I'm still lazy to expand it further quickly.) (WT-en) 60dot 06:01, 13 February 2007 (EST)

I have moved "Shin-Yakushi-ji" to "Other Spots" for the moment. Not trying to be too trivial, but it doesn't belong to the Nara WH. We may find a better place for it as editing goes on. (WT-en) 60dot 22:43, 13 February 2007 (EST)

But it's in Nara Park (or right on the edge), so I think grouping it with the others would be helpful for visitors. So, let's decide: geographically, which sights are in Nara Park, and which ones are outside of it? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 11:34, 15 February 2007 (EST)

You are right about the location. What annoyed me is that it doesn't belong to the "World Heritage". That's why I moved it out temporarily for the sake of accuracy. Look at what is included in Itineary A; Shin-Yakushiji can go into that group. The rest are also grouped relative to their geography in plan B and C. (WT-en) 60dot 12:38, 15 February 2007 (EST)

I'm not talking about changing the itineraries. I don't think we should group sights by "World Heritage" / "Not World Heritage" in the 'See' section. It would be more helpful for a traveler if we listed places by location instead. I re-arranged the article to show what I'm talking about. But I don't know these places:

1. Yakushi-ji Temple (薬師寺)
2. Gangō-ji Temple (元興寺)
3. Heijōkyū Palace Site (Nara Palace Site) (平城宮跡)[7] (Suzaku Gate(restored) (朱雀門), Daigoku-den (under restoration) (大極殿))
4. Tōshōdai-ji Temple (唐招提寺)

Should they be considered part of Nara Park? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:40, 15 February 2007 (EST)

None of the above four is in Nara Park. Gangō-ji Temple is rather inside Naramachi area. The rest are better accessed by bus. (WT-en) 60dot 06:41, 3 March 2007 (EST)

Thanks. Have you ever visited them? I'd like to add some comments for those temples, but I've never visited them. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 10:55, 3 March 2007 (EST)

Yes, but more than a decade ago. I do want revisit them before writing something on it - it is not much of my style to do so without verifying myself. (WT-en) 60dot 12:35, 3 March 2007 (EST)

Lord knows there's plenty of weird restaurants in Japan, but every web link I can find (eg. Nara prefecture, [1]), seems to indicate that Yatagarasu is a perfectly ordinary restaurant specializing in local chicken — it's even got counter seating in front of the open kitchen. Does the restaurant actually encourage getting frisky, or is it just like every other izakaya or karaoke box in town when people get drunk enough? (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:46, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Copy my discussion with this contributor:

You completely reverted the experience I had in this Nara restaurant, just based on an "assumption" that this is not possible, although I explicitly state that this is my experience. I do not know about Hamamatsu, but here in Tokyo love restaurants are a new gadget for couples who seek the thrill of having "sanctioned" sex in public.

It is this kind of unreflected editing that made me drop out of Wikipedia long ago. (unsigned)

I'm sorry for the revert, but I was just thinking, you know, Nara is NOT Tokyo. Much more rural place. The description of the restaurant that was there before was fairly positive and normal. Did you actually see people having sex in the restaurant? If the place is actually as bad as you made it sound, then our policy is not to list it at all-- we don't list negative reviews-- so it was either revert what you added, or delete the listing altogether, and I opted for the former, given that I only had the word of an un-registered user IP address (you) against what was there before. Perhaps you could just delete the listing and give a more detailed account of why you did so in a note on Nara's talk page? (WT-en) Texugo 01:45, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

I don't think deleting the entire listing is appropriate. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:09, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

The original listing was added by 60dot, a Nara resident with a long Wikivoyage edit history, especially with this particular article. The other guy should sign up for an account and establish some credibility before expecting to have wild claims like that accepted at face value. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 03:26, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

Though my English is inadequet, I would like to propose the reoganasation of articles about both Nara city and Nara prefecture. This is one tentative proposal.

• Nara
  • Nara Koen & Naramachi (containing the sights accessible from the train stations on Foot)
  • sorrounding (containing the sights advised to access by public transportation)
• Horyuji (containing the sights of Buddist Monument in Horyu-ji Area and surrounding)
• Asuka-Fujiwara (containing the sights of southern Nara basin, especially Asuka and Kashihara, featuring Asuka-Fujiwara: Archaeological sites of Japan’s Ancient Capitals and Related Properties )
• Yoshino(containing the sights of Mt Yoshino and Mt Omine areas in Kii Mountain Range)
• Nara (prefecture) (containning some isolated temples, shrines, hiking trails(maybe) and so on)
• One day in Nara
• Three days in Nara

What do you think? --79.180.38.230 05:13, 12 November 2007 (EST)

If you see a temple, shrine, hiking trail, or other important place that is missing, please add it to the articles! You seem to understand wiki formatting very well, but please make sure you've read the Project:Manual of Style before you make any major changes. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 09:20, 12 November 2007 (EST)

It might be interesting to add a few places in Nara, to be:

1. The Kaiten Sushi restaurant in the arcade next to the taxi stop at Kintetsu Nara. I will check the name the next time I'm there. It is quite good and affordable.
2. For drinks: the WooKoo bar is a nice place for foreigners, playing darts, etc. and friendly staff. It is close to JR Nara, in the main street. Since I don't know opening times, I can't add it for now.
3. There is a supermarket (a real one, not a convenience store) a bit hidden in the arcade. Will add details later as well :).
4. About the Nara Family: it is not that interesting. Expensive department stores; quite small and not even a supermarket (only one with luxury products in the basement). For real shopping go to Namba in Osaka :).

In a few weeks I will check out this issues and add them, but feel free to do it yourself! --unsigned

• It's not necessary for you to know the opening hours. Just use Google Maps or something like it to find the name in English and Japanese names, post it with a description, and let the next editor fill in the hours. --(WT-en) Orcrist 05:16, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

I have previously created an alternative banner for this article (which was initially created for the parallel article at the Hebrew Wikivoyage, but I decided to suggest we'll use it here at the English Wikivoyage article as well). Which banner do you prefer that we'll use on the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Strongly prefer the new banner -- you can tell what you're looking at! Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• I prefer the new banner for the same reason. Ground Zero (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• New banner. As stated by the above folks. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 02:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• New banner is better, but it's a bit off-putting to me that it's an asymmetrical cylindrical projection. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
• New banner but I agree with Ikan Kekek about it being off-putting. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply