Talk:DoubleTree

Hotels Mid‑importance

	Hotels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hotels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the hospitality industry, including hotels, motels, resorts, and destination spas 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.HotelsWikipedia:WikiProject HotelsTemplate:WikiProject HotelsHotels articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tags[edit]

Ok yet another tag with no explaination behind it. I almost want to go through and simply remove all tags that are placed with absolutely no reason given... but that would be presumptious. explicate please. Syzergy 03:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to request a disambiguation here[edit]

The original useage was as a part of a wagon or other horse or mule-drawn wagon (or plow or whatever) wherein the doubletree was the piece closest to the wagon (etc.) on the tongue, with singletrees attached to the doubletree, and then the animals attached by way of the traces of the harnesses to the singletrees. This setup not only made horse-powered travel possible for the opening of the American West (important enough for consideration I should think) but is still in use wherever teams of horses are used either for pleasure, exhibition, or commerce. Wikipedia has several photo references under "wagon" and "horse harness" and others. While it is a somewhat obsolete technology, it is hardly extinct, and it seems unfortunate to let someone enter it as merely an ad for a hotel chain. Suze Hammond, 21:21, Jan 2, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.24.20.206 (talk) 05:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, there are no mentions of the hitch so there is probably no need for a dab hatnote yet. In any case, this is likely to be a dictdef and on wictionary. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio[edit]

Most of the text from the "Brands" section is copied almost word for word from here. I've removed most of the info for now, but I believe that it could be worked back in while respecting the copyright. --Confiteordeo (talk) 08:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is certainly very advertisement-like as its headline says. It is sickly sweet and oozes the corporate line without contradiction. As I came to this link via an article on abuse of 'working' women, it would seem to me that the advertising 'gloss' is overdone here and therefore fails to be truthful and honest. But nothing I can do about it as I don't inhabit places like this! ;-)— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Comhar (talk • contribs) 10:24, 21 March 2012

Move?[edit]

I think this issue should be revisited. Hilton has rebranded several of its brands with auxiliary wording since the move decision was made. Two of Hilton's other brands, Homewood Suites (by Hilton) and Home2 Suites (by Hilton) already appear with the "by Hilton" wording on Wikipedia. Seems to me that there should be a consistent naming convention, so if we want to keep DoubleTree as the page name, then someone should update Homewood Suites and Home2 Suites accordingly. AlikaAlex 17:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 01:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

move to official trademarked name of brand Funandtrvl (talk) 23:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Official names aren't always the best title for articles, and I have doubts that this is really a WP:COMMONNAME. See also MOS:TM. --BDD (talk) 23:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)0[reply]
Ditto. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I doubt that the hotel chain's guests say "I'm staying at The DoubleTree by Hilton". 168.12.253.66 (talk) 13:22, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The suggested title is cumbersome and not the WP:COMMONNAME. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Suspected copyvio[edit]

This dates from February 2006. The likely source is doubletree.hilton.com, but archive.org does not appear to have archived that url. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain the issue? This article appears to have had several major rewrites since then and looks totally different? Vegaswikian (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]