Talk:Staycation

Virtual museums

I moved this from the article for discussion:

• Virtual museums and art galleries have sprung up everywhere. You can explore many rooms and exhibits from a 360° perspective from the comfort of your own home.

OK, well and good, but a staycation to me means actual physical tourism, not vicarious tourism from home. Because consider that if I'm surfing a virtual museum, I could just as well be looking at one from China or India as one from my home town of New York. I believe this entry belongs in a Virtual tourism article and not here. Your comments? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the removal. It seems there is still confusion about what a staycation is, perhaps because it was created out of the "Your House" joke article discussion. A staycation definitely involves real travel. It is real travel. Surfing the web, vacuuming, reading, etc. are not staycation activities. The joke article is about shutting yourself in the house. A staycation REQUIRES you to leave the house. One's house is typically the "Sleep" in a staycation, but the other headings (See, Do, Eat, Drink, Buy) are done outside the home. Is there any way to make this clearer? I guess it is an American invention, but I'm surprised the concept is still not easily understand. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 15:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I think part of the problem is that this article was created during a pandemic in which millions of people around the world are being asked to stay at home.

It wouldn't hurt to explicitly define what a staycation is, in the lead or "Understand" section. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Day trip

Is taking a day trip to someplace nearby valid for a staycation? Naively, the "stay" part of the name might imply no, and someone added the idea of a "nearcation" at the end of the article as a next step (implicitly making it distinct from a staycation).

However, a search for staycation "day trip" returns 340k results, whereas a search for nearcation returns just 14k. And as we're clarifying above, staycation is not the same as never leaving your house, so as long as you're going somewhere, why should there be an arbitrary limit that you have to stay within the bounds of "your city"? Indeed, for people who live in the suburbs or rural areas, there may not be much to do near home, and a trip to the Big City, far enough to count as a day trip, might be the only thing worth doing. But moreover, I think a day trip fits the spirit of a staycation: instead of spending money on an expensive plane or train journey and lodging, take a cheap car ride, fill the day with activities, and get home in time to tuck the kids into their own beds. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:37, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I think of a day trip as different from a staycation, but I think that's because I live in Manhattan, so a staycation would be to be a tourist in my own city (including other boroughs), whereas a day trip could take me as far away as Philadelphia, New Haven, the Catskills or Dutchess County in the Hudson Valley or the Connecticut or Massachusetts Berkshires (I did a day trip to Boston once, but that was for a friend's funeral, and I normally would at least stay overnight when I have to take 4 or more hours to get somewhere). If I lived in New Jersey, I might have a different attitude. I do think there's room for another article that specifically focuses on day trips, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I would describe a staycation as your local area. I agree that Ikan Kekek's daytrip examples to Philadelphia, Connecticut, etc. from NYC do not qualify as staycations. Those are entirely different destinations. A staycation doesn't have to ONLY be your town, but it should be in a place that doesn't take too long to reach. Less than an hour's drive away? 45 minutes or less? I don't really think it can be quantified, but it is much closer than traveling within a region. I have never heard the term "nearcation" but to me, it seems to be the same as a staycation or at least has a lot of overlap. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:22, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Sure, if you're already in a big city, it makes sense that it would take several hours to reach someplace similarly large enough to consider a destination. But consider the other case already mentioned: if you live anywhere in northern New Jersey, a trip to Newark or Manhattan takes 1 hour or less. There are probably people whose daily commute in that region is longer, so as a staycation trip to do some shopping and see some of the museums you might not have been to since your grade school field trip seems pretty reasonable, doesn't it?

Even from Manhattan, couldn't you go skiing in the Catskills mid-week without an overnight stay? (I certainly do similar trips from Seattle, about 2 hours drive each way.) I think that could also count for a staycation, when you compare it to a longer trip to Vermont.

I think, then, I'd write that it's a matter of perspective and opinion; one person's staycation is another person's day trip, depending on where you live and what big cities or small towns are nearby. What makes it a "staycation" is having a cheap trip close to home that doesn't involve "much" traveling. How much is too much depends on your preferences and lifestyle; a young person going solo may not mind driving 3 hours each way or packing a day full of activities, whereas for a family with young kids that wouldn't be feasible. --Bigpeteb (talk) 17:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I lived in the suburbs for 3 1/2 years of undergraduate school at SUNY at Purchase and 3 of my 5 years of graduate school at SUNY at Stony Brook. Suburbanites don't consider tourism in New York a "staycation", in my experience; they call it "going into the City". I think it's not quite a staycation unless maybe if you live in a really close-in suburb (especially right across the Hudson in places in New Jersey like Hoboken and Jersey City) but also not analogous to the time when one Labor Day, my girlfriend and I spent all day in Philadelphia, taking Amtrak there around 10:30 AM and getting back at around 3 AM. Incidentally, though, from Purchase to the Upper West Side in good traffic takes 20 minutes; in bad traffic, it can take 45 minutes to an hour, or in really horrible traffic, maybe more (there's no direct train connection, so if you don't have your own car, you have more or less expensive choices, all of which usually take longer). The train from Stony Brook to Penn Station takes 1 hour 48 minutes, and even a drive in good traffic takes at least 1 hour 15 minutes unless you speed, with longer times quite possible, so it's a much longer trip. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I think the "very local" aspect is still key. You can get quite far in a 3 hour drive. I think at that point, it's definitely a daytrip. I also don't think NYC or similar large cities are necessarily the best starting points. There are ample things to do in NYC, so it shouldn't be that hard to find places to go within the city. Some of the museums by themselves can basically fill an entire day, and they have lots of special exhibits that can easily attract someone back who's been there before. I know New Yorkers can still get bored of their city like anyone else, but I tend to think of smaller cities/towns where there's a more finite number of attractions (or in some cases is said to have none at all) when I think of who a staycation article is most useful for but also who a staycation might be the least exciting for and therefore who is most likely to need help in creating one that's fun, changing their mindset, etc. A lot of these small town areas have different towns within a 10-15 minute drive away. Those are the situations that I think "local area" is most apt for. In the US, possibly "within your county" is not a bad marker in most places (thinking Pennsylvania county sizes). ChubbyWimbus (talk) 02:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. I'm thinking about all the small towns in the Hudson Valley with small Historic Zones. You could get in your car and go to one after another that are close to the town you're living in. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Before rereading this thread, I made this edit to the article. Does that address this question well? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Now at least an outline article

I'm just checking, but I assume the article status is a mistake. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there anything we shouldn't link?

We normally wouldn't link hotels in any other article; why should we link that term in this one? I think maybe we should restrain ourselves at a certain point. Your thoughts? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I generally think it's fair enough for travel topics to link to other travel topics, even ones that we might not link to from destination articles. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:32, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

We do link to hotels from 20 or so articles though. I'm not a fan of overlinking, but useful links to any article should be allowed. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:50, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I added this link (and a bunch of others) which I thought would be helpful especially since this article doesn't go into much depth on any single activity/topic, and we have articles that do. However, I was a bit unsure about linking hotels in particular, since travellers are likely to be familiar with them even though our article details rating systems/classifications and gives practical tips. Also, most people on a staycation are probably sleeping at home anyways. So I don't have a problem removing the link if people think it doesn't add enough on a page with many links to travel topics.--JakeOregon (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I do think most of the links that were added recently are good. That's why I'm asking what we shouldn't link as opposed to what we should link. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 27 November 2020 (UTC)