Wikivoyage:Destination of the month candidates/Slush pile/2021
← 2020 | DotM slush pile for 2021 | (current) 2022 → |
Place: Bingara |
Nomination
|
- Close. Needs a general description, climate information, and more material on Do. Cope and Go next sections could be trimmed down. /Yvwv (talk) 22:14, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: An article should preferrably be nominated with the intention to feature within 12 months. Even in a cases where we have the schedule set for 6-12 months, a newly nominated article can make it into the schedule if it has very high quality, if it is very appropriate for a specific month, or if another article is slushed. Looking at the climate, the southern winter seems a bit cold (and we usually have plenty of northern hemisphere candidates for May to August). Shall we consider November to April? /Yvwv (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- The only issue with featuring it between Nov-April is that the massacre happened on June 10 1838, so hence why I proposed it to be either featured on May or June, exactly 185 years after the massacre. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Will there be any organized events for commemoration? /Yvwv (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Not sure. You'd have to ask KevRobbSCO although he retired from Wikivoyage. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- I did find a website, but to see whether there may be any organized events would have to be a wait for 2023. The AWE also doesn't have much, at least not yet. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Yvwv: I had a look into Bingara's official site. The main info "An annual Friends of Myall Creek Memorial Service attracts people from all over the country and is held every June long weekend at the Myall Creek Memorial monument". So yep, there is an organised event happening. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- Will there be any organized events for commemoration? /Yvwv (talk) 21:40, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- The only issue with featuring it between Nov-April is that the massacre happened on June 10 1838, so hence why I proposed it to be either featured on May or June, exactly 185 years after the massacre. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: An article should preferrably be nominated with the intention to feature within 12 months. Even in a cases where we have the schedule set for 6-12 months, a newly nominated article can make it into the schedule if it has very high quality, if it is very appropriate for a specific month, or if another article is slushed. Looking at the climate, the southern winter seems a bit cold (and we usually have plenty of northern hemisphere candidates for May to August). Shall we consider November to April? /Yvwv (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? Zero support votes and many unaddressed issues. We have many other Australian articles which make the cut. If this article has improved by mid-2022, we can nominate it again for 2023. /Yvwv (talk) 16:44, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- ok sure. feel free to. If anything, waiting till 2038 for the 200th anniversary would seem a much better alternative to me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 20:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- New England National Park could be another alternative that we could feature during that time which is up-to-date as well. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:35, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Dakar |
Nomination
![]() |
- Not yet' eat section and sleep section needs coords. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 19:13, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I remember the issue that came up in 2013 is that no-one who had actually lived in or visited the city had edited or judged the article. Is that still the case? I'd like to hear from some people who know the city. If we don't hear from any such people, we should presumably slush the nomination again. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe I could get someone from fr.voy to expand it? But that's of course, if they know English although it's still possible to expand an article without knowing a language. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Sure, but what's more important isn't so much that they speak French (several regulars here can get their way around written French, including me) but that they've at least visited the city and can judge the quality and accuracy of the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- The language thing isn't so important, but the main point is that for them to judge the quality of the article, they need to know some English to judge the quality and accuracy. There's quite a fair amount of users on fr that can only speak French there, or have a very basic knowledge of anglais. But I suppose I could cross check this article to the one on fr (another French speaker here, although it's not great). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:11, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Actually, forget that, because the fr article is only an outline article, although it looks usable to me. Maybe the pt article might be better, but I'm a pt-0 and would defer to someone who can read Portuguese. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:14, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- The language thing isn't so important, but the main point is that for them to judge the quality of the article, they need to know some English to judge the quality and accuracy. There's quite a fair amount of users on fr that can only speak French there, or have a very basic knowledge of anglais. But I suppose I could cross check this article to the one on fr (another French speaker here, although it's not great). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:11, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Sure, but what's more important isn't so much that they speak French (several regulars here can get their way around written French, including me) but that they've at least visited the city and can judge the quality and accuracy of the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? Seems as if no-one here has the first-hand experience to give this world city the detailed description it deserves. /Yvwv (talk) 01:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Slush. Lack of co-ords as mentioned above, several places have broken links, & intro to sleep says "Many first time visitors stay at the expensive Meridien." but there's no listing for it. Pashley (talk) 01:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Pyongyang |
Nomination
![]() |
- Question: are there any Wikivoyagers who've been here? I'm wary of featuring an article that's based purely on online research, especially for a quirky and difficult-to-visit destination like Pyongyang. I'd like to get confirmation that there are no severe gaps in coverage and that the information presented is coherent and useful for a traveller to Pyongyang. —Granger (talk · contribs) 05:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose In addition to what Granger said, there's a lot of work needed for a dotm. The sleep section is one example, where it says "This will be arranged by your tour company". Ok, but where do you arrange your tour company. In addition, does Pyongyang not have street addresses? Because only a handful of listings have street addresses. But overall, this seems more a usable article to me rather than a guide. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:38, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- On another note, would Pyongyang be a dotm or an otbp? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- I think otbp is right. For an international traveller, Pyongyang is off the beaten path by any sensible definition. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- This reminded me of the Otto Warmbier incident. I'm not sure we should be advocating travel to North Korea. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 20:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- I think otbp is right. For an international traveller, Pyongyang is off the beaten path by any sensible definition. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- On another note, would Pyongyang be a dotm or an otbp? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Not at the moment According to North Korea, "North Korea has shut down its border to foreign tourists." due to Covid-19, which is confirmed by a tour operator. Until multiple operators are running trips to Pyongyang, we can't check the information in the article (unless an editor has been there). One detail point: Both the North Korea and the Pyongyang articles refer to a "Youth Hotel" without giving an address. AlasdairW (talk) 23:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Given the above information, I vote to slush. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 13:42, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Venice |
Nomination
![]() |
- Close though the article is in a better shape than the last time it was nominated. Issues with the article are: listings without descriptions (for example churches in See, (provided they're all notable enough to be included)), listings without coordinates, and there are some parts of the article that could use more photos. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- In addition, if the Carnival defines when Venice will be featured, then we should run it in February only if the Carnival actually takes place. Otherwise later in the year, or perhaps Feb 2023. --Ypsilon (talk) 04:16, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- According to Venice's tourist website, the Carnival will be held without restrictions. /Yvwv (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- In addition, if the Carnival defines when Venice will be featured, then we should run it in February only if the Carnival actually takes place. Otherwise later in the year, or perhaps Feb 2023. --Ypsilon (talk) 04:16, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
SupportoLGTM. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- I change my vote from supporto to on hold as well, until the districtification things are sorted out. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hold it. User:Jonte-- started a Venice/Santa Croce article on September 1. There is also a Venice/San Polo article that Jonte-- stated in the Talk:Venice#Districts thread that they started on August 31. We can't feature this article until there is agreement about whether or how the city should be districtified on Wikivoyage, and then if it is, for the moves of listings and some other content to the district articles to be completed. Right now, there isn't even a discussion of districts, just a user who is unilaterally starting some district articles with the encouragement of one other user, without there being a Venice#Districts section where they are listed and linked or even a proposal that covers the entire city. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed, maybe we need to continue or discussion a bit more before. I don't think the main article is very good at the moment, it's cluttered and features too many listings per section. I'll write down a proposal of districts and we can start a more thorough work. Jonte-- (talk) 07:47, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- I propose we slush this nomination and only nominate it when we feel the article is good enough to be nominated for DOTM. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Agree Tai123.123 (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Until we get the districts sorted out. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:56, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- If we slush Venice, do we have a candidate for February? Melbourne/City Centre should not run so close to Sydney, Amsterdam is too cold, and Orlando still has some issues. Shall we schedule Addis Ababa? /Yvwv (talk) 22:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Orlando is much better now than when it was nominated. Articles such as this one from AP News concern me as they indicate the war is spreading. Otherwise, I would consider Addis Ababa to be the best candidate. I'll look for another nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- I was looking at other Italian cities and Turin looks good but it’s is only usable but I feel it could be updated to Guide as it looks good. If we were to feature Turin may would be better though as it’s hosting Eurovision 2022. Tai123.123 (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, I didn't see this, and I've nominated San Antonio. Turin looks good as well. We can nominate Turin now and add San Antonio at a later time. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- I was looking at other Italian cities and Turin looks good but it’s is only usable but I feel it could be updated to Guide as it looks good. If we were to feature Turin may would be better though as it’s hosting Eurovision 2022. Tai123.123 (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- The page name issue with Melbourne/City Centre also needs to get sorted out (see Talk:Melbourne/City Centre, given that the term "city centre" or "city center" does not have the same meaning as it does in other Commonwealth countries in Australia. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Orlando is much better now than when it was nominated. Articles such as this one from AP News concern me as they indicate the war is spreading. Otherwise, I would consider Addis Ababa to be the best candidate. I'll look for another nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- If we slush Venice, do we have a candidate for February? Melbourne/City Centre should not run so close to Sydney, Amsterdam is too cold, and Orlando still has some issues. Shall we schedule Addis Ababa? /Yvwv (talk) 22:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Until we get the districts sorted out. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:56, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Agree Tai123.123 (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- We have a candidate for February. If we can reasonably get Venice districtified for October 2022, the nomination should remain. Otherwise we should slush. /Yvwv (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? There has not been much improvement lately, and the first suitable slot for this article would be in early 2023. If the article is in better shape by mid-2022, we can nominate again. /Yvwv (talk) 12:42, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Well, since it has zero support votes, and you as the nominator are ok with it, then sure. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Orlando |
Nomination |
- Support as nominator. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I question "Any time of the year". I think it shouldn't be featured during hurricane season or summertime. Winter is probably the best time to feature, followed by early spring and late fall. Hurricane season is getting worse and longer, but here's some basic information]: June 1-November 30, but especially August-October. So I think we should probably recommend a feature between December and April or so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Changed. Maybe I'm quite biased since I've been here only in July all the times I've been here. I suppose SelfieCity is a better person to comment. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Needs work. Many of the listings are not in Orlando, but suburbs of Orlando. This is an important distinction similar to suburbs of Atlanta, as suburbs have an identity of their own, particularly (in Orlando’s case) on the northeastern side of the city. As for time of year, I’d lean toward a spring or fall feature, which is the best time of year: November and April-May are probably the best times of year. I can do some work on the article, of course, but I can’t be sure how moving the listings to nearby suburbs would affect the region. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- So winter isn't a very good time to visit? I would have guessed it was, but I've actually never been to Orlando. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- It’s not a bad time to visit, but particularly the north can get cold spells, though nothing like NY. People visiting Florida expect warm weather, and you don’t get that about half of the time in winter, particularly inland. The weather stabilizes in spring and becomes warm but not hot until late May or June, so it seems to be the optimal time to feature. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 11:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, how cold are we talking? Also, "time" extends till July above. Can we cut that back to early May? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- It’s not a bad time to visit, but particularly the north can get cold spells, though nothing like NY. People visiting Florida expect warm weather, and you don’t get that about half of the time in winter, particularly inland. The weather stabilizes in spring and becomes warm but not hot until late May or June, so it seems to be the optimal time to feature. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 11:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Hurricanes are serious in Florida, but I’d say the summer heat and humidity is a stronger reason not to feature Orlando then. As an inland, more northern location, Orlando rarely gets them, while the Keys and the southern parts of each coast that are the most vulnerable. However, the humidity and heat makes summer unpleasant and there’s no coastal of Gulf Stream effect to moderate the temperature. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work - still at usable status, meaning it's not eligible for nomination but it probably could qualify for guide status. Some listings lack coordinates and/or contact information. A few more photos here and there wouldn't hurt, and are there just 8 things in Orlando worth listing in See? Time-wise, as others have pointed out, not during the hurricane season, and I believe summer can be pretty hot, so winter or spring would probably be optimal. --Ypsilon (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say summer is hot in Orlando. But that's just me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 13:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
[undent]: According to the climate chart, average high temperatures are at 90 or above from June-September. I think that's pretty hot, though you might be used to hotter temperatures in Australia and the average lows are OK every month. By the way, all the winter months look quite comfortable to me. The lowest average low is 49 in January, and unless there's more than a light breeze, that's probably just long sleeves and a cordoroy jacket for me, though I know the Floridians are likely to turn on their electric blankets and wear sweaters indoors. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- I can do some work on this article and I can probably get it up to guide and therefore DOTM-ready status, especially with help. However, I’ve been focused on getting outline city articles to usable status lately, and I’ve substantially improved at least fifty articles. If I manage to get the vast majority to usable status, which is my goal, I’ll think about whether to proceed with finer adjustments, such as getting some city articles to guide status, improving region articles and improving the articles of major cities such as Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa, and Miami. Florida’s articles were in bad shape when I started this work about a year ago, and their status has a come a long way, but Florida is a big place, with a population probably not far off that of Australia, and rising fast, so it’s a huge task. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- I did some work on this article and is significantly closer to where it should be. Hopefully within the next few months it can be ready. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:33, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- I can do some work on this article and I can probably get it up to guide and therefore DOTM-ready status, especially with help. However, I’ve been focused on getting outline city articles to usable status lately, and I’ve substantially improved at least fifty articles. If I manage to get the vast majority to usable status, which is my goal, I’ll think about whether to proceed with finer adjustments, such as getting some city articles to guide status, improving region articles and improving the articles of major cities such as Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa, and Miami. Florida’s articles were in bad shape when I started this work about a year ago, and their status has a come a long way, but Florida is a big place, with a population probably not far off that of Australia, and rising fast, so it’s a huge task. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Support. Most issues mentioned above have been addressed, and this article is clearly superior to Recife, which still has zero support votes and is not worked on. We should however avoid two back-to-back DoTMs from the same country. See talk page for suggestion. /Yvwv (talk) 22:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
- How can the nomination of a usable article be supported? Unless or until this is classed as a guide, it's per se ineligible for consideration. Is it properly a guide? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- As DoTM got more competitive, we can afford to be strict with the criteria. We will not feature Orlando before northern autumn 2022 in any case. /Yvwv (talk) 02:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? This article has not improved much for a few months. We have plenty of good candidates, some of them from the United States. If the article is better in mid-2022, we can nominate it for early 2023. /Yvwv (talk) 16:10, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Buenos Aires |
Nomination
![]() |
- Close some minor brushups needed, but otherwise LGTM. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment- quite good article, though it could use a few more pics here and there. Will probably sit around until Norhtern Winter 2022-23 so improvements and updates that are done now may need to be redone closer to when its featured. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? No support votes, some defined issues, and no significant improvement. Common practice is to slush three months past nomination. /Yvwv (talk) 19:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Guadalupe Island |
Nomination
![]() |
- Very very close. A climate section would be nice, even if its a one liner but it's not a big issue. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment, it was slushed in 2018 as some content was speculation based, is it better now Tai123.123 (talk) 14:49, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet and probably not at all. It was slushed in 2018 - at the time I had doubts about the accuracy of the article, and the major issue was that there was no information on how to apply for a permit to land, which other sources suggested was required. To quote from my earlier review:" I don't think that we should feature somewhere that no contributor has visited unless there are reliable published sources of visitor information." AlasdairW (talk) 14:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- We once featured Nauru, and I'm also pretty sure no contributor has ever visited Nauru before (it gets around a few hundred visitors a year). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:21, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- The difference is that there is a Nauru government webpage about visting the island - a "reliable published source". In 2018, I looked for information on visiting Guadalupe Island and the best I could find were academic journals in Spanish. A diving operator says that a permit is required to visit the island, but gives no details. I think that the article should be downgraded, or a warning box added encouraging readers to check the information. AlasdairW (talk) 11:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- We once featured Nauru, and I'm also pretty sure no contributor has ever visited Nauru before (it gets around a few hundred visitors a year). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:21, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose. I wrote much of this article. However, I've never been there; I wrote it purely as an effort to improve our coverage about difficult-to-access destinations. I thought it was at usable status. However, despite it being at guide status now, I don't support featuring it, as much of the information ought to be improved and put into perspective by a local or visitor, and likely the latter given the low level of development on this island. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 16:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? With the addressed problems and very little improvement since nomination, we can consider the nomination to fail for this time. /Yvwv (talk) 03:58, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- I agree, slush. I think the problems discussed in the previous nomination are significant enough that this article should not be featured until it has at least been checked by someone who's been to the island. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:13, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Recife |
Nomination
![]() |
- Very close per comment. --Ypsilon (talk) 11:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Almost Support just some minor brush ups needed. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Almost per others. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:40, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- With zero support votes, no work done for the last few months and a bad pandemic situation in Brazil, we might consider to put Recife on hold. We could do Mui Ne or Orlando in January. /Yvwv (talk) 21:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- The pandemic shouldn't be a good reason to put things on hold. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Agree with SHB and the article doesn't have that many issues. As I said above, Ibaman and Lazarus made many edits to the article in 2020, and I deleted places that were out of business in January this year. It probably just needs a similar inspection before its featured, to be scheduled a month or two before that. --Ypsilon (talk) 04:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, but we need some consensus to support before we can feature. It is concerning how many nominations do not receive four support votes before being featured. Let's definitely review this article before it goes on the main page. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Agree with SHB and the article doesn't have that many issues. As I said above, Ibaman and Lazarus made many edits to the article in 2020, and I deleted places that were out of business in January this year. It probably just needs a similar inspection before its featured, to be scheduled a month or two before that. --Ypsilon (talk) 04:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- The pandemic shouldn't be a good reason to put things on hold. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- With zero support votes, no work done for the last few months and a bad pandemic situation in Brazil, we might consider to put Recife on hold. We could do Mui Ne or Orlando in January. /Yvwv (talk) 21:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
On hold. Could possibly be featured in late 2022, so IMO there is no need to slush. /Yvwv (talk) 13:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? No one seems to care for the article anymore. We have many fine candidates lined up now, though it would be nice to see more South American articles. /Yvwv (talk) 03:51, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- Only if Ypsilon is ok with that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:31, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- I'm inactive at Wikivoyage at the moment, do as you like. Ypsilon (talk) 13:25, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, then Yvwv, go ahead SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:05, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
- I'm inactive at Wikivoyage at the moment, do as you like. Ypsilon (talk) 13:25, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- Only if Ypsilon is ok with that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:31, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Place: Ștefănești |
Nomination
![]() |
- Needs work - Nice to see articles nominated from countries we haven't ever featured on the Main Page before! Though there are at least two issues with Ștefănești - the banner size (it should have a 7:1 proportion, now it's too tall) and many listings don't have a description or contact information including street address. --Ypsilon (talk) 10:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work per Ypsilon Some work on the sections "Eat" and "Drink" would get us much closer to nomination status. This work needs to be done to maintain guide status, also. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work per above. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:44, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work I have fixed the banner. However listings are lacking in details. Do includes this: "DJ741. Try to drive on this spectacular road modernized in 2016 between Mioveni and Stefanesti, project financed by Argeș County Council." - it might be a good rural road to drive on for the views, but you don't just drive on because the council paid for it. AlasdairW (talk) 22:59, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- On hold due to zero support votes and several unaddressed issues. /Yvwv (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? The article has been up for nomination for more than three months, with zero support votes and several unaddressed issues. /Yvwv (talk) 21:24, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
- Well it would be unfair towards the nominator who nominated this article as they've been working on this for over a year, but otherwise, I'm ok with slushing. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Brunswick, ME |
Nomination
![]() |
- Almost. Well-written article, and it seems to cover the destination well. A bunch of listings still need coordinates, but other than that it looks good to me. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
- Close - Overall this is a good article for a small town but listings from Do onward need coordinates, there are places in Drink that are just mentioned but should be listingfied and finally a few Sleep listings lack descriptions. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- Almost per others. ButteBag, if you know the area, which I assume you do, perhaps you could make the changes we've suggested. If so, I'm sure this would make a good featured article! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
- Not yet coords needed for the Do section, and drink section could be properly formatted. Some other cleanups needed but I'll try and fix that. Also, what does "Yes it's Maine, but you're still in civilization." mean? (I'm not that familiar with NE US) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Zero support votes and almost no improvement for 18 months. Another New England destination is up for nomination now. Time to slush? /Yvwv (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'd prefer the other NE destination to be featured than Brunswick. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I think that'd be unfair towards the article's main contributor User:ButteBag who has also nominated it. Years before the article will be featured and comparatively little to fix in the article is a combination that doesn't motivate people to improve the article. To make sure the articles are up to date, improvements are better done closer to the time its featured (June 2022 or thereabouts) than now, let alone a year and a half ago. If anything, articles that are seemingly in a mint condition but haven't been touched in, say, half a year before they're supposed to be featured should be postponed or slushed. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! I added a bunch of co-ords some time ago. I wasn't under the impression everything needed to be listing-ified to be nominated. Probably most listings are different now, as I had visited in pre-covid times. Slush away. ButteBag (talk) 18:28, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I think that'd be unfair towards the article's main contributor User:ButteBag who has also nominated it. Years before the article will be featured and comparatively little to fix in the article is a combination that doesn't motivate people to improve the article. To make sure the articles are up to date, improvements are better done closer to the time its featured (June 2022 or thereabouts) than now, let alone a year and a half ago. If anything, articles that are seemingly in a mint condition but haven't been touched in, say, half a year before they're supposed to be featured should be postponed or slushed. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'd prefer the other NE destination to be featured than Brunswick. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
- Zero support votes and almost no improvement for 18 months. Another New England destination is up for nomination now. Time to slush? /Yvwv (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Place: Space There may be a thing or two that needs to be updated before we run the article, for instance the commercial space flights the companies are or will be selling tickets to. |
Nomination
![]() |
- Almost. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work per Ypsilon, to make sure the science/technology information is accurate. If and when, I'd be able to support featuring this article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Not yetOppose this article is far too western centred. The number of listings that related to the countries of former Soviet Union has only four listings, and there's only one listing related to China. Why is there none in Africa? A FTT can't be western centred, because after all, we are an international travel guide. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)- China and Soviet should obviously be handled better, but Africa hasn't exactly been the prime actor in the Space Race, so it not featuring prominently does not mean much. Of course, African sites should be added when they pop into mind. –LPfi (talk) 06:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- I was thinking of Sansa sites in South Africa. Don't know any in mind, but there'd certainly be some. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- China and Soviet should obviously be handled better, but Africa hasn't exactly been the prime actor in the Space Race, so it not featuring prominently does not mean much. Of course, African sites should be added when they pop into mind. –LPfi (talk) 06:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, do add African sites if you can come to think of some, I wasn't aware of such places in Africa other than some NASA's space shuttle launch abort landing sites, and those may not be much to look at, particularly now as the space shuttle program is discontinued. --Ypsilon (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm wondering if space as a travel topic (for visiting launch sites, museums, observatories etc) would be better treated as a separate article to space as a destination? Yes, a literal interpretation of the latter is only available for a few disgustingly wealthy and selfish shits at the moment, but there are other "almost space" attractions out there for people with more normal incomes, from zero gravity experiences both at ground level and in aircraft, to tourist-oriented astronaut training programmes with NASA and simulated space missions, not to mention astronomy, scientifically-realistic video games etc. An article that summarises the ways you can actually get to space (or to the next best thing) would probably have enough content to exist separate from an article about space-themed sites on Earth.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:52, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: This article is categorized with Other destinations. Should we nominate it as Off the beaten path instead? /Yvwv (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Very good question. But I think the answer hinges on whether my above point about splitting is a valid one. Space-themed attractions are usually very much on the beaten path for millions as long as their location is accessible, and collectively form a strong travel topic. Space itself is obviously as far off the beaten path as you can get (though perhaps the ocean floor is less visited).--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think there is too much of a difference between visiting sites with "zero gravity experiences" and visiting museums and launch sites. Both are places not in space, but scattered around the globe, in the usual fashion handled by our travel topic articles. If we treat Space as a real destination article, then it is for those "few disgustingly wealthy and selfish shits" and coach travellers dreaming of being one of them (to be rude – in your coach you can of course disregard the monetary and environmental aspects, with no harm done). –LPfi (talk) 09:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- It used to be an "Other destination" article, in 2017 I suggested it to be moved to a travel topic for the reason that for virtually everyone "Space travel" means looking at the sky or visiting related places on Earth. Can't remember if it was me who moved it to travel topic, but apparently it's an Other destination again. --Ypsilon (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I could see the merits of a “space museums and sites” article distinct from space itself. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:28, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- I created Space flight sites from the relevant sections of the space article. /Yvwv (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- OK, good. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 16:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- I created Space flight sites from the relevant sections of the space article. /Yvwv (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I could see the merits of a “space museums and sites” article distinct from space itself. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:28, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- It used to be an "Other destination" article, in 2017 I suggested it to be moved to a travel topic for the reason that for virtually everyone "Space travel" means looking at the sky or visiting related places on Earth. Can't remember if it was me who moved it to travel topic, but apparently it's an Other destination again. --Ypsilon (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think there is too much of a difference between visiting sites with "zero gravity experiences" and visiting museums and launch sites. Both are places not in space, but scattered around the globe, in the usual fashion handled by our travel topic articles. If we treat Space as a real destination article, then it is for those "few disgustingly wealthy and selfish shits" and coach travellers dreaming of being one of them (to be rude – in your coach you can of course disregard the monetary and environmental aspects, with no harm done). –LPfi (talk) 09:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- With zero support votes, a couple of issues pointed out, and very little work done since nomination, we should consider slushing. /Yvwv (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- I would support slushing per Yvwv. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- I don't. There's more than half a year before the article will be featured. Ypsilon (talk) 14:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Shall we have a rule of thumb to slush an article if it goes for 3 months with zero support votes? Then we have until mid-November to improve the article. There can of course be exceptions. If a nomination is clearly unsuitable it can be slushed faster, if it is near completion it can get more time. /Yvwv (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- I don’t know if we need a rule for this, but the principle is a good one and I would support slushing this article unless we see some willingness from someone to improve the article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, we should slush when there are zero support votes, serious deficiencies in the article, and no great improvements for 3 months since nomination. Time to slush on 14 November, in other words. /Yvwv (talk) 21:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Yvwv: It's the 14th now. Slush? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:25, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, we should slush when there are zero support votes, serious deficiencies in the article, and no great improvements for 3 months since nomination. Time to slush on 14 November, in other words. /Yvwv (talk) 21:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- I don’t know if we need a rule for this, but the principle is a good one and I would support slushing this article unless we see some willingness from someone to improve the article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Shall we have a rule of thumb to slush an article if it goes for 3 months with zero support votes? Then we have until mid-November to improve the article. There can of course be exceptions. If a nomination is clearly unsuitable it can be slushed faster, if it is near completion it can get more time. /Yvwv (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- I don't. There's more than half a year before the article will be featured. Ypsilon (talk) 14:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- I would support slushing per Yvwv. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Very good question. But I think the answer hinges on whether my above point about splitting is a valid one. Space-themed attractions are usually very much on the beaten path for millions as long as their location is accessible, and collectively form a strong travel topic. Space itself is obviously as far off the beaten path as you can get (though perhaps the ocean floor is less visited).--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Place: Addis Ababa |
Nomination
![]() |
- Support as nominator. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: it looks like a good article, and while normally we don't like to make comments on status based on current events, the war in Ethiopia is a major concern if we're considering a destination of the month feature. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- But isn't the war in Tigray, which is about 1000km north of Addis Ababa? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Article quote (linked above): “The deadly fighting has now spread beyond Tigray into neighboring regions, and fracturing in Africa’s second most populous country could destabilize the entire Horn of Africa region.” Not to mention that a military draft indicates those across the country will be impacted. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- That is something we can figure out later. Should there actually be a war going on (or a risk for such) in or near the city itself anytime before its time to feature we should slush or postpone it. --Ypsilon (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Article quote (linked above): “The deadly fighting has now spread beyond Tigray into neighboring regions, and fracturing in Africa’s second most populous country could destabilize the entire Horn of Africa region.” Not to mention that a military draft indicates those across the country will be impacted. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- But isn't the war in Tigray, which is about 1000km north of Addis Ababa? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Close - One of the articles I updated using Internet sources a year ago or so, because we usually have a shortage of articles featurable during the colder half of the year in the Northern Hemisphere winter and African articles. I planned to nominate this sometime later on myself. The article may need some minor updates before going live and some listings need a description. --Ypsilon (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Ypsilon, SelfieCity: although it might be better to wait until we have the time issue fixed. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:31, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Next Northern winter is full so there will be more than a year before we run the article. Whatever work is made on the article today may need to be redone closer to the time it's featured. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:21, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Scheduled for February. If not safe, we can run Lisbon, as we have few European articles in this season. /Yvwv (talk) 00:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- Security update: The United States has issued a "Do not travel" warning for the entire Ethiopia due to the uncontrolled civil war, and other countries have leveled their travel warnings (Australia: Reconsider need to travel, Canada: Avoid non-essential travel, UK: Against all or all but essential travel, consider leave).
- While it may be too subjective, I have a feeling of Addis Ababa becoming Kabul No. 2 (or Saigon No. 3). Unless we see some Warsaw miracle, perhaps for some time we should consider Lisbon with priority for the coming DotM.廣九直通車 (talk) 08:30, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- On hold due to emergency. /Yvwv (talk) 12:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? The emergency is not likely to be resolved within 12 months, or long time enough to put the nomination on hold. /Yvwv (talk) 15:42, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Grand-Bassam |
Nomination
![]() |
- Comment - it was slushed in 2015 apparentl because it was hard to verify the listings. Perhaps Internet coverage has become better since? --Ypsilon (talk) 17:52, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet. Needs history, climate and vicinity information at the very least. /Yvwv (talk) 13:31, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? For nearly 3 months the article had zero support votes, and almost no improvement. Unless there is a specific reason to keep voting, that is a reasonable threshold for slushing. /Yvwv (talk) 20:05, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- Agree as nominator. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 20:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Seville |
Nomination
![]() |
- Some work needed per my comment above. --Ypsilon (talk) 18:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work per nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:40, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet. Looks good overall, but lacks climate and safety information (pickpockets should be mentioned). More information about flamenco would be appreciated. With these additions, Seville would be good to go in spring 2022. /Yvwv (talk) 09:25, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Needs work per Yvwv and Ypsilon. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:29, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Slush? For four months, we had zero support votes, and very little work done. We have a bunch of strong candidates from Latin Europe. /Yvwv (talk) 16:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm fine with slushing. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 19:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Place: Mamallapuram |
Nomination
![]() |
- Support as nominator, though a couple of listings could use a longer description (possibly it could be a good time to do that if the article per above is updated closer to when it's featured). Ypsilon (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- Support but it could use a bit of polishing. Pashley (talk) 11:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Almost per Pashley. The fact there are no "Do" listings doesn't seem good enough, in my opinion, for a featured article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- I've done a copy-editing pass, got rid of many oddities probably introduced by Indian editors with good but not perfect English. It needs to have someone else take a look, find what I missed.
- I'd have this as DotM, not OtBP. It is one of the region's main tourist draws & a World Heritage site. Pashley (talk) 02:07, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet Descriptions needed for some of the see, and the do bit needs a lot of work for it to be featured on the main page. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:37, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
@Ypsilon, Pashley, SelfieCity: since quite a lot of work is needed to be on the main page, slushing? I personally think this needs a lot of work to be featured on the main page SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Shall we run San Ignacio in January instead? That is the only unscheduled OTBP candidate with at least one support vote and favorable season. /Yvwv (talk) 10:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- I'm all for it, especially when it's got two support votes now. Much better candidate to go on the main page. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Place: Banteay Chhmar |
Nomination
|
- Very close per comment. --Ypsilon (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- Close. The lengthy “get in” section is a bonus for a somewhat remote destination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet The lack of coordinates is a no no. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:37, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- With zero support votes and very little work done, should we run Gävle in November instead? /Yvwv (talk) 08:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Well, not everything need to have coordinates. I planned to make some edits to the article later on, but I guess I shouldn't be deciding each and every article on the Main Page and if you'd really like to see Gävle up in November then feel free to slush this one. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- With zero support votes and very little work done, should we run Gävle in November instead? /Yvwv (talk) 08:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Place: Tourist Drive 33 |
Nomination
![]() |
- I moved the nomination back here, because DotM and OtBP features are for destinations whereas FTT are for all other kinds of articles. Overall this seems like an informative article, but there are some things that make me say just almost support now. Some points need a description, a few also need a marker/coordinates (eg the galleries next to the fire trucks). Left-alignment of photos and maps are, per Wikivoyage:Image_policy#Image_alignment, a thing we try to avoid unlike at Wikipedia, and it would be nice to have some photos in the last third of the article. As we try to keep some distance between articles from the same part of the world, and Sydney goes on the Main Page in December 2021 (Melbourne/City Centre probably in March 2022), a slot during Sep-Nov 2022 could probably be the time showcase this article. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Also I choose to withdraw this nomination since it's not the best article for an FTT. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- Outcome: Nomination withdrawn. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Um, is that how it works? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Dunno, because we can't have Sydney, then Melbourne and then another Australian one within 12 months. There's also the fact that some areas are still recovering from the 2019-20 bushfires and one of the side trips mentioned was claimed as closed, with no sign of reopening. So not until 2023. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- I vote to slush per SHB, if that helps. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, now there's actually an explanation, slushing is fine with me.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Well, worse-quality articles have been nominated, improved and featured. Per se, I don't think it's impossible having three Australian articles within a year, though this one and Sydney are from the same state... But if the nominator feels the nomination should be slushed and the article is better featured sometime later in the future, then I think we should respect him and slush it. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, now there's actually an explanation, slushing is fine with me.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- I vote to slush per SHB, if that helps. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 10:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Dunno, because we can't have Sydney, then Melbourne and then another Australian one within 12 months. There's also the fact that some areas are still recovering from the 2019-20 bushfires and one of the side trips mentioned was claimed as closed, with no sign of reopening. So not until 2023. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Um, is that how it works? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Agree with Ypsilon. I think at this point, we do have consensus to slush this article, so if SHB you'd like to go ahead and do that, I think the individuals involved appear to be in agreement. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:19, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Place: Presidents of the United States |
Nomination
![]() |
- We should be aware that this article was started by a user who is now banned; however, users in good standing have done lots of work on it. I'll look it over later and see whether I think it should be featured, but based on my feelings about it the last time I read it, I would think so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet - the article should have guide status and if there are still any controversies related to the article's content they need to be resolved first. Ps. When I first saw the article I was thinking that this could be suitable to feature during the United States Semiquincentennial in 2026 or otherwise around the 4th of July (ie. in June's FTT slot). --Ypsilon (talk) 09:37, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- One month later, there's a debate on the talk page about the rules concerning how to edit the article... Let's throw the nomination on the slush pile and perhaps reconsider nominating it after a year or two at earliest. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- No -
it needs to be nuked, per Ikan. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC) - Comment — I don't work on this article as much as most do, but I'm a little confused as to why it's not ready for guide status. Three years of focused collaboration have taken place, and there's already a talk page archive and likely one or two more in order. As for the article itself, a few listings don't have descriptions, but most do. Is it ready for guide status? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:21, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment — This seems to be a mess of properties which are only listed because Donald Trump's "Trump Organization" has its branding on them. That's hardly fair, unless there's some historical reason (other than "Trump owns them") for them to be on this list. We don't tout one innkeeper over another, unless it serves the traveler.
- If we go for three months with zero support votes, we could slush. /Yvwv (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Place: Groningen |
Nomination
![]() |
- Oppose articles can't be featured twice (OtBP July 2017). --Ypsilon (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oops. Didn't check that. Can I instant slush this? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, please do. Plus, we do already have a nominated article from the Netherlands for next summer right above this one. --Ypsilon (talk) 08:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oops. Didn't check that. Can I instant slush this? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Place: Clausthal-Zellerfeld |
Nomination
![]() |
- Very close - per my comment. --Ypsilon (talk) 22:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not yet. Some listings have short descriptions or no description at all. For example under "Learn" no explanation is provided regarding the placement of the university as part of the travel guide. However there is certainly potential to make it a featured destination, so if someone would like to continue translating and improving it, it could be a good choice for next year. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:24, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
It has now had "a cursory review by a native speaker". I saw no major language problems. There were some minor ones which I did not take time to fix. Pashley (talk) 00:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet Per The edit history this article is largely in a state of pre-Covid and there is danger of a lot of stuff being outdated. As we do not have someone "on the ground" we would have to rely on internet research a lot... Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ahem, I actually went through the article top to bottom the day I nominated it. Yes, that was six months ago but we haven't beforehand had any problems with the article having been checked up a few months before - unlike articles that have been checked up several years ago. As this isn't a resort or other destination for which tourism is a "matter of life and death" but a normal town, I do believe most businesses are still there but it can of course be checked up closer to the time when the article is featured. Ypsilon (talk) 18:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not yet - the language may be mostly free of mistakes, but it's not very good quality (in that it's obviously translated) and the intended meaning isn't always clear. For example, the stuff about the cycle routes (which I removed) was almost incomprehensible and could do with rewriting by someone who knows about cycling and can translate whatever information is available from the official site. The mint now turned glass-blowing centre is mentioned in Understand, but doesn't have a listing. There's no detail on how to get to the town from the airports. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I actually don't have much motivation to work on this article further (as the edits in October apparently went unnoticed). But last weekend I went through Bergen (Germany) which was also at guide status (& looked better), and deleted places that have closed down and I've just added some places to drink that are still open. Therefore I will slush this nomination within an hour or so and nominate Bergen as August's OtBP instead. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Place: Heathrow Airport |
Nomination
![]() |
- Needs some work - updating and general pruning and probably some more photos. --Ypsilon (talk) 09:12, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support More pictures would be nice, but this is a good article and has been a Guide for a long time. I have full confidence that whatever work is needed will be well in hand by the time the article is run. Good nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:35, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- Almost. I'd like to see more coordinates, so that people can find amenities on the dynamic map. At the very least, we should indicate the terminals and concourses. (I know they're on the Mapnik layer, but the casual user might not know how to switch to it, and I understand there may be privacy/cookie concerns.) --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Not at the moment - postpone to 2023 People read airport articles for up-to-date practical advice, rather than to dream about where they might go next year or the year after. This article bears little resemblance to what you would find today. For example, since 1 June flights from "red list" countries arrive at terminal 3 - and contractors will take passengers to a quarantine hotels. The article has only one mention of Covid. We should only feature this article if there is the interest available to make the regular updates which are required at the moment. (Dublin Airport might be an alternative as it has had a lot of updates this year and is probably close to being a guide article.) AlasdairW (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- In that case, I would suggest to try to update the LHR article first. If that's not possible, we shouldn't replace it with an airport article because it would require those same updates. Plus, given that Cork is DotM in July, another Irish article in August would be a bit too close. There's been a year since we last featured a railway article, so Rail travel in Great Britain could maybe be an alternative (it does have an updated warning box)? --Ypsilon (talk) 09:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- No - as AlasdairW mentioned above, this should only be added once the pandemic is over. Only include Airports like Auckland, which still are well running. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- If airport articles should be valid for the travels right now, I think there wouldn't be much point in running AKL as entry to New Zealand at the moment, due to COVID, seems to be more restricted than most other countries (well, apart from Australia where the borders are entirely closed). So if LHR can't be updated we shouldn't replace it with another airport article but with some other kind of article. For instance Rail travel in Great Britain that I mentioned above, or Archipelago Trail, or something else. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Rail travel in GB has the same issues as Heathrow; the practical information is very different now than it will be in two or three years' time: the timetables are still reduced due to Covid, but more importantly the entire system is getting renationalised to a greater (Scotland and Wales) or lesser degree (England and cross-border services). Details of these, particularly of the changes in England, are still rather sketchy, so it's better to wait until more information is known and we have a clearer timescale.
- While I'm here: not yet for LHR or other airport articles.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- If airport articles should be valid for the travels right now, I think there wouldn't be much point in running AKL as entry to New Zealand at the moment, due to COVID, seems to be more restricted than most other countries (well, apart from Australia where the borders are entirely closed). So if LHR can't be updated we shouldn't replace it with another airport article but with some other kind of article. For instance Rail travel in Great Britain that I mentioned above, or Archipelago Trail, or something else. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- So consensus seems to be to slush the nomination as of now, and I will do so shortly. Luckily it won't be hard to find a replacement for August's FTT. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Place: Horse racing |
Nomination
![]() |
- Support as nominator. Ypsilon (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The list of destinations, however, should be in bullets, I believe. We ought to get a support vote from someone who is very familiar with this topic. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I would like to see what @Ikan Kekek, The dog2, ShakespeareFan00, Dale Arnett: thinks. Personally, as so long as we can address any concerns other wikivoyagers might have, than I would give my support of the nomination. It's nice to get the mind off of COVID for a while, and see how far this article has came. :) Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 17:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - There's the small matter of addresses for listings being in the wrong format, with city, state abbreviation and zip code. I think that such specific addresses are an error in a worldwide topic, anyway, and that each listing should include only the name of the venue, the description and a Wikivoyage link to the article for the city it's in. Otherwise, the article looks quite extensive, and I'd be happy to support a feature after the listing format is cleaned up, if others who know more about horseracing approve. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Not yet. The listings need a bit of work. There is a lack of consistency in the formatting details. In some of the "Destinations", there is a link to the city in the title, in others it is in the text. Almost none of the museums link to a city. It may not be policy, but I think that Travel Topics should only list places which are listed in a city article, and should link to the city article for opening times etc. If it is not worth seeing when a general visitor is walking past, then it is not worth a specialist visitor flying around the world to see. There also appear to be errors in the museum listings, I have fixed a couple, but ideally all listings should be checked. AlasdairW (talk) 18:04, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Not yet per AlasdairW, and on a similar note, most of those external links should be internal links instead, with the websites only listed from the city page.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Response @Ypsilon, Ikan Kekek, AlasdairW, ThunderingTyphoons!: The gist of what I'm reading so far is (1) Use inline links on listings, and make them bulleted, and (2) Adjust the listing criteria for each track. Is that correct? By the way, although I'm not on WV often anymore, I am willing to adjust this as needed. Thanks, Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 20:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- As Thundering says above, inline links to the "Do" section for each relevant city (or, when relevant, district) article, not a link to the racetrack's website, which should be in the full listing in the linked Wikivoyage article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- There will probably be as much or more work to do to the city articles to provide the details of the stadiums, museums etc. For example I failed to find the "People's Stadium" in Belize in the article for San Ignacio (Belize) which is where it is shown on the map, although I wonder if it should be in Orange Walk Town based on w:Orange Walk People's Stadium, but there is little information online. AlasdairW (talk) 22:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- We can probably delete it if we can't find enough information. In any case, there are probably other better known horse racing venues in the region (eg. in Jamaica) that we can list. The dog2 (talk) 19:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- There will probably be as much or more work to do to the city articles to provide the details of the stadiums, museums etc. For example I failed to find the "People's Stadium" in Belize in the article for San Ignacio (Belize) which is where it is shown on the map, although I wonder if it should be in Orange Walk Town based on w:Orange Walk People's Stadium, but there is little information online. AlasdairW (talk) 22:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- As Thundering says above, inline links to the "Do" section for each relevant city (or, when relevant, district) article, not a link to the racetrack's website, which should be in the full listing in the linked Wikivoyage article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Sorry, I just now noticed the article was nominated for FTT.
I think the lead and Understand need to be rewritten. Not knowing these sports I have a feeling it is biased towards USA and the former British Empire, and perhaps towards some kinds of races. What about cross country equestrian jumping or whatever it is called (part of "eventing", according to en-wp), isn't that a race? And what about the trot monté?
I would also like the article to explain some basics. The lead tells horse racing is an equine sport with an international following. But it does not say what kind of equine sport it is. It goes on telling about thoroughbred racing, referring to the thoroughbred breed, but again not telling what the difference is between this and other races – the used breed? And when introducing harness races the article hasn't said that jockeys ride on the horse, and doesn't say they don't in harness racing.
–LPfi (talk) 22:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Suggestion to slush
From all of the above comments the article is similar to European classical music – extensive but incomplete despite being rated guide (and should probably be demoted to usable status). There has been some improvments to the article since its nomination, but two of its major contributors (Zanygenius2 (WV-en) and Dale_Arnett) haven't been active as of lately. SC asked for someone familiar with the topic to support the nomination but I can't see any such support. So I suggest we should slush it. As replacement we could run the Stockholm itinerary already in May and the current oldest FTT nomination Wire tour in June (the weather in Baltimore can't be that unbearable in the summer) to avoid overlap with Crawford. --Ypsilon (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- Any comments? --Ypsilon (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, there's been so much going on in Recent changes, I overlooked this. I agree with the plan to slush, as there doesn't appear to be anyone who will fix it.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Anybody else? The Featured Travel Topic will change in a few hours. I'm going to upload banners for Stockholm history tour and The Wire Tour soon, so it will be possible to go forward with the plan. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- This one is going on the slush pile; I think the banner can be moved to the article's talk page so as not to clog up the featured banner nomination because the article is not going on the Main Page anytime soon. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:13, 22 April 2021 (UTC)