Jump to content

Talk:Leaf peeping

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Nice addition, Mikie. -Schmeebis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.212.58.87 (talk) 17:51, 6 February 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
  • It was mocked in season two of The West Wing in the episode "And It's Surely to Their Credit," in President Bartlet's weekly radio address.
  • An episode of Family Guy features the town of Quahog being overrun by leafers from New York.

{{tourism-stub}}

I removed the above and put it here. This section is as big as the first two small paragraphs. That's not right. See WP:AVTRIV. A trivia section should not be as big or bigger than the main part of the article. Also, depictions of leaf peepers on TV don't really tell the reader anything about leaf peeping. It's totally irrelevant if a fictional character on TV has mocked leaf peeping. I recommend expanding the article with actual information on leaf peeping, not irrelevant trivia from television. I'd like to see someone justify this kind of information being in the article. How does this help people learn about leaf peeping? Mr Spunky Toffee 23:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct--but you should have left the tourism stub bit alone. --Jemiller226 01:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you should have done that. I agree that it should not have been larger than the bulk of the article but the use of the term in media is absolutley relavent. It shows that the term has permiated into the mainstream and is not just a term known by those who participate. It seems that you are more concearned with the fact that it was negative, but that should not matter. Use in popular culture sections are an accepted part of wikip. Anon(talk) 17:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Merge from Leaf peepers

[edit]

These two articles should be merged. They cover what is essentially the same subject, the article about the people has already been transwikied, and a merge would at least ensure that the article has a chance of growing into something useful. Mindmatrix 21:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! These articles should be merged - it would be much more useful to get the information for "leaf peepers" and "leaf peaping" together since they are related, and relatively obscure topics. - LHC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.146.5.129 (talk) 07:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have made leaf peepers a redirect to here. Kingdon (talk) 17:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merging with Momijigari?

[edit]

There is a discussion at wikipedia:wikiProject Japan about merging this article with Momijigari, the Japanese tradition of viewing Autumn leaves. It may improve both articles.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Placed merge template on Momijigari. See discussion on that talk page for details. Andyo2000 (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a section of this article. As the traditions in Japan are somewhat different, I think it should be a separate section. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I’d oppose it. Momijigari is a well written stub; Leaf peeping is a mess, with a clean-up tag in it. How would merging them improve matters? Also, they are about different subjects, only tangentially related. Momijigari is about a custom elevated to a tradition; Leaf-peeping seems to be largely derogatory. People go out to enjoy autumn colours in a lot of countries, not just in Japan and the US, but we don’t have, or particularly need, articles on them all; these are particular, and different, aspects of the practice. They already have a “See Also” link; that’s as far as it needs to go. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS Also, as Momijigari is a lot older than Leaf Peeping, a merge from there to here is a bit US-centric, isn’t it? Moonraker12 (talk) 13:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV issue

[edit]

This bit is absurdly unencyclopedic: "People growing up in the '70s often recall hearing the phrase in the family car come from their father while trying to get to an event on time. It was often used more in annoyance." It sounds like one person's very specific memory that they are etrapolating. Unless someone has a source in which multiple people recall such an experience, I suggest it is taken out.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.166.11.143 (talk)

Yeah, take it out. Kingdon (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History section?

[edit]

I have heard some refer to leaf peeping as a modern invention of the tourism industry; I would like to see some citations for or against, for example:

Mind, in this speech I have been trying merely to do honor to the New England weather -- no language could do it justice. But, after all, there is at least one or two things about that weather (or, if you please, effects produced by it) which we residents would not like to part with. If we hadn't our bewitching autumn foliage, we should still have to credit the weather with one feature which compensates for all its bullying vagaries -- the ice-storm: when a leafless tree is clothed with ice from the bottom to the top -- ice that is as bright and clear as crystal; when every bough and twig is strung with ice-beads, frozen dew-drops, and the whole tree sparkles cold and white, like the Shah of Persia's diamond plume. Then the wind waves the branches and the sun comes out and turns all those myriads of beads and drops to prisms that glow and burn and flash with all manner of colored fires, which change and change again with inconceivable rapidity from blue to red, from red to green, and green to gold -- the tree becomes a spraying fountain, a very explosion of dazzling jewels; and it stands there the acme, the climax, the supremest possibility in art or nature, of bewildering, intoxicating, intolerable magnificence. One cannot make the words too strong.

From Mark Twain's Speeches (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1910). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Taylor (talk • contribs) 20:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leafers acceptable name?

[edit]

The article made it sound like leafers was a derogatory name for this people. But I think that it was an acceptable name and one that people would be okay with. Should leaf peeping add that these people are sometimes referred to as leafers?

65.214.67.173 (talk) 19:41, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leaf peeping. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leaf peeping. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leaf_peeping&oldid=1201478299"