Talk:Vacation rental

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Travel and Tourism: Vacations Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Vacations.

This article is prone to spam. Please monitor the References and External links sections.

This site is being seriously spammed just like real estate with commercial spam. With your permission and cooperation I would like to clear this article of the external links MKS 03:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please advise how one determines the appropriateness of an external link? If I wanted to link to an article onHawaii Vacation Rentals that talks specifically about areas rentals are available, how can I determine if it's appropriate to this wikipedia page? Thanks for any help.Passive Income Nut (talk) 02:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Without having the proposed link available, it's impossible to review. For a general guideline, see

WP:EL which discusses which types of articles are and are not appropriate. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Basically, since this is an article about the general concept of vacation rentals, no actual provider of rentals would be acceptable. About the only thing I can imagine is something similar to the one already on the page--some sort of link to a national/international group that is representative of a very large number of vacation rental companies. Note that I don't mean just a simple aggregator (like a generic travel site, or a company that helps coordinate a lot of various rentals). Rather, I mean an actual trade organization. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I keep trying to add a link to a blog that discusses vacation rental regulation, and every time I add the link it is removed. The link is entirely consistent with the section on the "vacation rental" wiki page that deals with Restrictions on vacation rentals, and would be useful to anyone who wanted to know more about this topic. The link serves NO commercial interest. The organization that writes the blog is a non profit volunteer organization and does not list vacation rental homes for rent or sell any service. Note that the EXISTING LINK to the VRMA organization can not make this claim. What is the problem with providing Wikipedia readers with this information? I thought that was the entire point of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougcoates (talk • contribs) 02:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place to promote your personal blog. See

WP:COI. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

I am a recognized authority. I have dealt successfully with attempts to regulate vacation rentals in multiple communities, I have been interviewed on the topic on the radio, I have been interviewed by news organizations and quoted in the news media on the topic. In fact I am the only person that is an authority on this topic at the national level. How do we clear this up? My only goal is to get this information out to the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougcoates (talk • contribs) 02:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't here to "get information to the community", at least not in the sense that you mean. The point is to provide encyclopedic information. Blogs are almost never acceptable external links. You would need to be a very clear expert, as in most people with specialty knowledge of the field would be familiar with you. We used to even say that you should be notable enough for your own Wikipedia article. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect -- I have to ask -- 1) what is your level of expertise on the topic of vacation rental regulation, that puts you in the position where you can judge me not to be a "very clear expert". 2) is there some objective procedure to go through to become recognized as an expert in the context of a wikipedia posting? 3) if wikipedia is an encylopedia, why would it not want information posted that deepens knowledge in the area of vacation rental regulation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougcoates (talk • contribs) 03:52, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to make qualitative improvements to the article content, particularly any that utilize sources that meet Wikiedia's definition of a

WP:ELNO. It's simply not an appropriate external link. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:25, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

I do plan to edit other parts of the page -- there is lots of missing information. However there is far too much material on the subject to just include it in the text of the page. The organization's web site includes copies of laws, legal opinions, surveys, studies and tons of other info that wouldn't be appropriate to include in the text of this page. I am constantly adding to it, so I don't see it as being appropriate or efficient to put all of this info into the Reference section for this Wikipedia page either. Referring readers out to a place for more information seems like an appropriate solution. Questions: 1) would a reference to the organization (the North American Assoc of Vacation Rentals) be more acceptable than a reference to the blog web site? 2) what is it about the external link to the VRMA web site that is acceptable, if the reference to my body of information is not acceptable? VRMA is not the only national organization in this arena, and VRMA's manner of operations specifically excludes certain people who need info on this topic. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougcoates (talk • contribs)

Well, it's possible that the VRMA should be removed as well. We do consider national/international trade organizations to sometimes be legitimate EL for topics of this nature, but if there's dispute about including it, we should remove it. As for your questions to me the reason that I doubt that you qualify as an expert is the evidence you yourself gave: being interviewed on radio and quoted by the media. That's probably not enough. But are you claiming that you are so famous in the field that you would be widely recognized as an expert by the majority of people in the Vacation Rental industry? One thing that might help would be a link (here, on the talk page) to some of those media interviews you gave; that would help evaluate to what extent you were relied upon as an expert. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no dispute about VRMA being on the page. I was just raising the question of why they would be acceptable but another organization doing very similar work would not. You say you doubt that I am an expert, but in a prior post you didn't identify what qualifies you to evaluate my expertise when I asked. There were several other direct questions I asked about how I could make this work that were ignored too. I think I'll just leave things where they are with Wikipedia and provide my information through other more accessible web sites. Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougcoates (talk • contribs) 04:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did answer your question. I said that 1) an expert would be someone widely recognized across the field by any regular member as being well known and of opinion of substantive weight (that's expanding what I said, but the basic idea was there before). Additionally, I specifically asked you if you could provide evidence that verifies your expertise (i.e., some links to the times you said you've been interviewed or quoted). I didn't notice your question sabout NAAVR; I'd have to take a look (or have others take a look) at the site to find out if it's okay as an EL. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article

I concur, especially since that article is entirely unsourced. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now done. --Mhockey (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--I totally forgot about this. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:44, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The short term rental article should not be solely focused on apartments for the purpose of vacations. Nearly anything can be rented short term, from tools to commercial and recreational vehicles, jets, housing for vacation or non-vacation uses, and so on. The topic of short term rental should cover the various rentals, not just one type. I'm bringing this up here for input/ideas. For example: Should it be a disambiguation page, or an article as a definition? ---- DrGvago (talk) 11:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, but the first image of this Wikipedia entry is a very misleading one. The depicted cottages are not vacation rentals, they are guest houses of the Internationale Naturschutzakademie on Vilm Island. Tourists and other average travellers don't have any access options to this buildings. So it is very silly to present this as an example of a vacation rental. Therefore I will remove it now. J.-H. Janßen (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]