Talk:Virtual tour

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

Travel and Tourism 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors: [[Travel Technology#Applications|Travel technology applications]] The anchor (Applications) has been deleted. The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links. Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

I propose that this article needs cleaning up. The article is very much acting as a web directory in some parts, which Wikipedia is not. Also the structure of the article wrt. headings is bad. -Andrewduffell 18:59, 26 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

There is way too many external links. Anyone have any suggestions of what should stay, and what should go? -Andrewduffell 19:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

This article covers more technical virtual reality methods. Virtual tourism focuses on integrating these methods into innovative applications of distributed visual learning expereinces that help support sustainable economic development business models. I'd advocate NOT merging articles since they seem to address different audiences.

66.45.145.191 12:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

merge - The subject matter is not sufficiently distinct to warrant separate articles. Torc2 09:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

merge - I agree that the subject matter is too similar to warrant a new article. Jason Quinn (talk) 19:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

merge - Could be made into a legitimate article, but has no dedicated contributors likely to do it Adam McCormick (talk) 01:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

{{fact}} added. I don't doubt the technical details, but do we have a third-party published reference (i.e. not on Colin Johnson's website) to this being the first ever Virtual Tour system? Tearlach 12:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Added a citation as suggested; with link to the Center of the Study of Architecture (CSA) newsletter archives which goes back to 1995. There's also reference to a British Museum publication within the 'First use' section which maybe could be used as a separate reference.Azureskies 21:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I feel that this page could do with a rewrite and a more concise introduction. There also currently exists two pages on the same subject; different only in the plural of the title - 'Virtual tour' and this page 'Virtual tours'. I feel that these pages should be merged if that is possible Azureskies 20:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think the first project of this type was actually the Aspen Movie Map. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I feel this article reads more like an advertisement for realtor.com than a factual encyclopediic article.

Supporting references are missing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.68.157 (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've merged in from Virtual tours and done some reworking and trimming. Let me know if there are any issues. Adam McCormick (talk) 02:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I submit that we should not have a list of companies, nor should we have a section on a buzzword like 'metaverse' at all, certainly not based on a single source. Anyone care to discuss? MrOllie (talk) 18:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also worth mentioning that that single source (and the 'sources' added subsequently) don't even mention virtual tours. The section is hopelessly off topic for this article. MrOllie (talk) 14:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply