Français
ItalianoPurpose of this article
[edit]What is the purpose of having an article about suburbia? Right now it mostly looks like an unreferenced Wikipedia article and there are hundreds (if not thousands) may have "something exceptional", but I can safely assure that the number of people visiting such places just because of "that exceptional factor" is essentially in the triple digits (i.e. planning students – who have way better sources than a travel guide anyway). --SHB (t | c | m) 23:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- Consider Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#Can_adults_from_high-income_countries_be_ignorant_of_public_transportation?, which highlights even well-traveled adults (including travel journalists) lack experience which many other people see as basic. The prospect to look for accommodation in a suburb to visit a large city is a complex one. Also, suburban design is in itself an important concept of architecture yet to be covered by Wikivoyage; at least some representative examples from different regions of the world should be mentioned. /Yvwv (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- The difficulty is that generalizing about the suburbs is not a really useful thing to do, overall. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- "[S]uburban design is in itself an important concept of architecture yet to be covered by Wikivoyage" – that is the most pseudo-style of architecture I've ever heard of. Suburban design is a broad term and there is no one style of suburban architecture, so that's not a very strong argument. --SHB (t | c | m) 07:32, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
While suburbs are said to be boring to the extent that most tourists avoid them, I made a serious attempt to gather advice on how to have a relatively practical and entertaining stay in a suburb. /Yvwv (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- That really depends on the suburb. Some suburbs are old central cities, themselves, quite a few have historic zones, and some are in beautiful locations on river or lakefronts or seacoasts, etc., or in the hills with great views. Some have great municipal parks. Where did you make the serious attempt, and did you have a particular area in mind? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article is suburbs. Of course, generalizations have to be made. /Yvwv (talk) 22:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- You'll see that I edited that article a lot. The idea that suburbs have nothing but boring or chain restaurants is often inaccurate, as is the idea that none of them have crime problems, especially considering the banlieux in France and such. I guess it's good to have a general Suburbs article, but is it going to be much more helpful than Cities would be? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- I raised my concerns on the talk page, but this is way too overgeneralised. There isn't a whole slew of content that's actually helpful for travellers – and as someone who is in the planning industry, I really could break down the entire article just to prove how uninformative this is. --SHB (t | c | m) 23:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't know you worked in urban planning. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- (Or event planning?) WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nah Ikan was correct haha. --SHB (t | c | m) 22:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've been convinced that this article is worthwhile. However, I don't agree that suburbs and planned cities are the same, and the article appears to cover the latter. I would suggest moving the title to Planned cities. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:10, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Mhm, you are right that they're not the same; in a lot of cases suburban growth is usually unplanned (which is suburban sprawl) and really varies down to developers, but yeah they aren't the same as if an entire city was planned (like Canberra). This article in its current form is a random mix of both (Ikan's edits have somewhat helped make the distinction clearer). --SHB (t | c | m) 23:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. I don't think suburbs is a topic of its own; it's too generalized. But I think planned cities constitute a valid travel topic. Hence, I suggest the page move. I would note that the Destinations section lists planned cities, some of which aren't suburbs. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- But since planned cities are not at all the same as suburbs, I'd suggest if the article is moved, that there be no redirect. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 00:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- The first places I think of as planned cities are Brasilia and Chandigarh. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, those should definitely be included. The question then stands whether semi-planned cities, such as Washington, D.C. should be included. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 02:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Paris, too. Yes, I think they're both worth a mention. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, those should definitely be included. The question then stands whether semi-planned cities, such as Washington, D.C. should be included. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 02:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- The first places I think of as planned cities are Brasilia and Chandigarh. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Also agreed. I would definitely support a planned cities travel topic (and maybe even a separate topic for semi-planned cities if the topic gets way too big). --SHB (t | c | m) 06:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I would support a planned cities travel topic. I think we could also have a travel topic on Suburbs and Commuter Towns, but it would be fairly different from the present Suburbs article. People stay in suburbs because:
- They are visiting friends or family - there is probably not much that we can usefully say in that case.
- They are travelling for work and staying near the customer, conference centre etc.
- The focus of their visit to the city is an attraction in a suburb
- They want to avoid the bustle of the city, perhaps as they are travelling with children (or dogs).
- They want to stay in a cheaper suburban hotel and eat at cheaper restaurants used by locals.
- In the latter cases we can have useful general advice on choosing a suitable suburb and getting a balance between city centre attractions and suburbia. AlasdairW (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- In some places, the suburbs will be closer to the airport. The opposite is usually true for rail travel. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- AlasdairW, there are also many suburbs that are very pleasant day trips from major cities. In the New York area, people visit suburbs all up and down the Hudson in New Jersey, Westchester and Rockland for the views, hiking and pleasant atmosphere, and similarly visit places on the Long Island Sound in Westchester, Connecticut and Long Island, and they also visit the Jersey Shore to go to the beach. An example of a specific attraction in a suburb is the Great Falls in Paterson, NJ, but these other places may lack specific attractions as such but be more generally attractive. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I would support a planned cities travel topic. I think we could also have a travel topic on Suburbs and Commuter Towns, but it would be fairly different from the present Suburbs article. People stay in suburbs because:
- Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 00:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- But since planned cities are not at all the same as suburbs, I'd suggest if the article is moved, that there be no redirect. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. I don't think suburbs is a topic of its own; it's too generalized. But I think planned cities constitute a valid travel topic. Hence, I suggest the page move. I would note that the Destinations section lists planned cities, some of which aren't suburbs. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Mhm, you are right that they're not the same; in a lot of cases suburban growth is usually unplanned (which is suburban sprawl) and really varies down to developers, but yeah they aren't the same as if an entire city was planned (like Canberra). This article in its current form is a random mix of both (Ikan's edits have somewhat helped make the distinction clearer). --SHB (t | c | m) 23:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've been convinced that this article is worthwhile. However, I don't agree that suburbs and planned cities are the same, and the article appears to cover the latter. I would suggest moving the title to Planned cities. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:10, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nah Ikan was correct haha. --SHB (t | c | m) 22:59, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- (Or event planning?) WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't know you worked in urban planning. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- I raised my concerns on the talk page, but this is way too overgeneralised. There isn't a whole slew of content that's actually helpful for travellers – and as someone who is in the planning industry, I really could break down the entire article just to prove how uninformative this is. --SHB (t | c | m) 23:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- You'll see that I edited that article a lot. The idea that suburbs have nothing but boring or chain restaurants is often inaccurate, as is the idea that none of them have crime problems, especially considering the banlieux in France and such. I guess it's good to have a general Suburbs article, but is it going to be much more helpful than Cities would be? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article is suburbs. Of course, generalizations have to be made. /Yvwv (talk) 22:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
For planned cities, Canberra would probably count as one. Yerevan as it exists today is known for being an example of an early Soviet planned city. I don't know if New York City would be considered a planned city but Manhattan is basically an orderly grid pattern north of the Financial District, which was clearly planned. In Australia, Adelaide and Melbourne also have a very orderly grid pattern in the city centre.
Singapore is a bit of a grey area, so I don't know if it should be included, since the city has expanded well beyond the original area that Sir Stamford Raffles had planned. Nevertheless, you can still see the legacy of that plan to a limited extent. Chinatown was the original area designated for the Chinese by Raffles, while Kampong Glam was the original area designated for the Malays and Arabs. The original Indian area called Kampong Chulia no longer exists. European Town, the original area he designated for white people, is where you will find the highest concentration of colonial buildings like the old City Hall and Supreme Court. And Commercial Square, which he designated for trading, is now Raffles Place, but the colonial buildings there no longer stand, and it's now surrounded by skyscrapers. The dog2 (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- One issue with a potential planned cities article is that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of planned cities around the world. The capital cities make for an obvious choice to be listed, but what is the criteria we use for others? It's a rather subjective topic and there is no one clear criteria for what makes a city more "planned" or a better "planned" city in this very context (well there is a criteria for what makes a better planned city, but that's not exactly the type of "planned" we're talking about here). --SHB (t | c | m) 01:01, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is it worth having an article that says that but then lists particularly interesting planned cities, or would it be better not to have one at all? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- About New York City: Manhattan's street grid is planned, and there are to a lesser extent street grids in Brooklyn and Queens, but does that make New York a planned city? Only partly, I think. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think what's interesting for a traveler would be a good criteria to use (it is subjective, but something has to stand out and I think that's a doable criteria). --SHB (t | c | m) 02:54, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed, and I think it's clearly better to have an article with selected destinations rather than none at all. It doesn't need to be an exhaustive list, per Wikivoyage:Avoid long lists. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 03:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think New York may be interesting if it was historically the first city that's still populated that adopted a crosswise grid. I'm using caveats because there were ancient cities that are now ruins that used grids. I seem to remember Pompeii was one of them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- NYC would definitely be worth a mention for being the first in the Americas to adopt a crosswise grid. SHB (t | c | m) 04:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Australia, Adelaide's plan of an orderly grid system in the city centre with parks surrounding it is certainly worth a mention. I've never heard of another city planned on that way. The dog2 (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, no objection to NYC being on the list. Adelaide too. I think some of these indirect examples could use markers, with descriptions in prose/paragraph form, rather than a list format. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 16:00, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- For Australia, I think most planners would agree on Canberra and Adelaide being mentioned, in addition to Griffith and Leeton. Mildura is probably 50/50. --SHB (t | c | m) 23:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- We should add Celebration. The city takes planning a step further by regulating every aspect of construction and house design. Even the color you paint your house has to be from Walt Disney's selected color palette. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 23:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- In Australia, Adelaide's plan of an orderly grid system in the city centre with parks surrounding it is certainly worth a mention. I've never heard of another city planned on that way. The dog2 (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- NYC would definitely be worth a mention for being the first in the Americas to adopt a crosswise grid. SHB (t | c | m) 04:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think New York may be interesting if it was historically the first city that's still populated that adopted a crosswise grid. I'm using caveats because there were ancient cities that are now ruins that used grids. I seem to remember Pompeii was one of them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed, and I think it's clearly better to have an article with selected destinations rather than none at all. It doesn't need to be an exhaustive list, per Wikivoyage:Avoid long lists. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 03:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Is it worth having an article that says that but then lists particularly interesting planned cities, or would it be better not to have one at all? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
And I think in New Zealand, Christchurch is quite well known for its city plan. I've heard people liken Christchurch to Adelaide in Australia, but I've never been to Christchurch myself. Perhaps Lcmortensen can comment as a New Zealander. The dog2 (talk) 19:34, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Nah, Christchurch isn't really that planned (having spent time in both cities). The reason why it's likened to Adelaide is largely because both cities feature a lot of green space. --SHB (t | c | m) 21:16, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- So do we have consensus to move the article to Planned cities without a redirect? That doesn't prevent anyone from writing on article about Suburbs (although I personally don't see how that could be an article of its own — prove me wrong!) --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 21:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- You're correct that suburbs don't have much of a travel relevance and I agree with moving with no redirect. --SHB (t | c | m) 21:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think Planned cities should be written from scratch. Little of the current content is relevant for the new article and the new article won't have much relevance for those contemplating to stay in a suburb when visiting a city, which i think is the focus of the current article. –LPfi (talk) 07:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with LPfi. This should be written from scratch. The dog2 (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think Planned cities should be written from scratch. Little of the current content is relevant for the new article and the new article won't have much relevance for those contemplating to stay in a suburb when visiting a city, which i think is the focus of the current article. –LPfi (talk) 07:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- You're correct that suburbs don't have much of a travel relevance and I agree with moving with no redirect. --SHB (t | c | m) 21:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- So do we have consensus to move the article to Planned cities without a redirect? That doesn't prevent anyone from writing on article about Suburbs (although I personally don't see how that could be an article of its own — prove me wrong!) --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 21:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- I personally wouldn't call Christchurch a planned city. Twizel is an example of what I would call a planned town in New Zealand: it was built in the late 1960s to house workers for the Upper Waitaki hydroelectric scheme. Lcmortensen (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- I have created planned cities from scratch with listings of a select few examples. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:34, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
North London.
[edit]Some of the North London suburbs are notable for Architectural reasons. Especially those North West London suburbs that developed due to the Metropolitan Railway in the 1920's and 1930's (Although I think Metroland is further out). Mention of Suburbs should also include planned communities like Bournville ( Suburb of Birmingham) which was unique for being 'temperance' for much of the 20th century. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:50, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Explore the world
United states
New York
Japan
Tokyo
Singapore
Singapore
