Wikivoyage

Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/April 2011

< Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion
← March 2011 Votes for deletion archives for April 2011 (current) May 2011 →
  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:13, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:16, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2006, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:35, 1 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:15, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:58, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:03, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since August 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:08, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This looked quite useful, and not that far from usable status, to me. – (WT-en) Vidimian 13:53, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. Agree with (WT-en) Vidimian. This is a handy way to see southwestern British Columbia. I had forgotten the article existed... I'll work at improving it over the next couple of months. - (WT-en) Shaund 00:17, 24 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:12, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This is a fixed historic route like Route 66 or the Silk Road, and it is signposted to boot, and likely to be recreated if we delete it. (WT-en) texugo 22:06, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
See also similar comments at the nomination for The Jesus Trail below. Signposted, fixed routes should be exempted. (WT-en) texugo 23:47, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:13, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since October 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This is an actual waymarked hiking trail (see Wikipedia article here), and as such, should be kept as per a brief discussion here that suggests official, and well-known itineraries should be exempted from "delete if outline after a year" rule. However, as per naming conventions, it should be renamed to Jesus Trail, with the "the" dropped. – (WT-en) Vidimian 14:08, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep It's a legitimate trail. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:21, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:15, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:35, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:39, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Small airline in American Samoa. Current text is a history of the company copied from Wikipedia. Probably needs to be merged somewhere, but I'm not sure where.

  • Merge - (WT-en) texugo 04:43, 18 February 2011 (EST)
  • Delete or redirect, without merge, in the spirit of Project:Cooperating with Wikipedia#Sharing content. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 09:52, 18 February 2011 (EST)
  • Delete. This article looks like a promotional page for a business, and would be better handled as a listing within a town served by the airline. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 18:22, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
    Any further comment? This nomination has been open for much longer than the required two weeks, and with two delete votes I'd assume that would be the correct resolution barring further comment. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:10, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Merge contact and destination information to American Samoa. All that history and such is completely unnecessary in a travel guide. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:37, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - All info except the contact details are of little interest to travellers. The American Samoa page has it listed with a url under Get in. The phone and reservation email should be on there too. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:48, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. Useful info merged in with [American Samoa] - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 23:04, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:40, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:15, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - Not much of worth on the page. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 09:33, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:47, 3 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since its creation in October 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:46, 20 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete. – (WT-en) Vidimian 16:40, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Cardboardbird 12:03, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete or merge. My comment on the "Talk" page:

There is already a Wakefield travel guide: http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wakefield_%28Rhode_Island%29

It looks pretty good, too. What does this article add that's important? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 15:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - Looks like a bunch of business listings. Some (most?) of which are not relevant for a travel guide. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:51, 2 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:44, 9 April 2011 (EDT)

Unincorporated town of 30-35 inhabitants, or 170 if you check Wikipedia, with no accommodations and possibly one single unconfirmed restaurant. The historical site contains 5 small buildings, all walkable. The town is right next to the slightly larger Bogue, KS, for which we have no article. The most logical redirect would be for Hill City about 8 miles away, but there is no article there either. The next town for which we have an article is Stockton, still only about 16 miles away (a stone's throw for Kansas), and I think a paragraph or so in that article would suffice.

  • Merge and redirect to Stockton - (WT-en) Texugo 23:33, 20 January 2011 (EST)
  • Merge and redirect to Stockton looks right. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 00:58, 21 January 2011 (EST)
  • 16 miles seems a long way to me. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:50, 21 January 2011 (EST)
  • If it is the nearest town with an article the choice is to redirect there or create an article for a nearer town. I also dont think 16 miles is particularly far. It is further than that to the central business area of the city I live in from my home suburb. If it is considered a short distance it its region as is claimed by Texugo I would be quite happy for it to be redirected that far. I would also have no problem with someone who knows the area creating another article for a nearer city, but preferably with a bit of content. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 15:24, 21 January 2011 (EST)
  • Any further comment? This nomination has been open for much longer than the typical two weeks, and it looks like "merge & redirect to Stockton" is the consensus. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:10, 27 March 2011 (EDT)
    • Can't we just create a stub for Hill City and redirect it there? There's an awful lot of open space between Nicodemus and Stockton. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:37, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Merged and Redirected to Stockton (Kansas) -(WT-en) Cardboardbird 23:41, 9 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - The info is pretty general and, given the location, probably totally out of date by now. (WT-en) Cardboardbird 04:38, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:29, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since its creation in September 2009, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:46, 20 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:34, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. The text in this article shows up in a Google search (one example: ) so is clearly copied and there is no indication that it can be re-licensed under the CC-SA. Additionally, the article appears to be an itinerary for a commercial tour, and thus is more of an advertisement than a true Wikivoyage itinerary. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:49, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 09:26, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete If it were new, I'd say speedy. (WT-en) Pashley 04:59, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:38, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

Border and in-image text do not match our style.

  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 12:11, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete. It's also orphaned, which is sufficient justification for deletion according to Project:Deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:38, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Can we take out the border and text and then use it in the Cranston article? (WT-en) –sumone10154 15:04, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
    • Although tineye doesn't find any matches, images with borders and writing are often taken from other web sites, and given that this image does not specify a license, is orphaned, and was uploaded by a user who made no other contributions my preference would be to delete it rather than risk a possible copyvio for an image of minimal value that has been unused for several years. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:15, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Speedied - (WT-en) texugo 21:46, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Map obviously taken from a printed guide.(WT-en) Cardboardbird 12:00, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
  • It doesn't look like a scan, but TinEye produces a boatload of results. Which makes me think that "lp" in the compass rose stands for "Lonely Planet". However, this image is on Shared and must be nominated for deletion there, not here. (WT-en) LtPowers 15:09, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Ok, my mistake. Nominated there there now. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 21:39, 9 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. Seems like another established hiking trail. – (WT-en) Vidimian 16:51, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
I'd actually still argue for deletion - this hasn't received a substantial edit in four years, and trails aren't automatically in scope for Wikivoyage per Project:What is an article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:38, 2 April 2011 (EDT)
After taking a second look, I've noticed that everything this article has to offer is already duplicated at Yilan County#Itineraries, so the trail article is not strictly necessary to keep around in its current state and could be recreated at any time. But as the Google search results I've linked above shows, this trail seems like a sufficiently popular one, so how about redirecting rather than deleting—this would, IMO, be more in line with Project:Deletion policy#Deleting vs. redirecting as well. – (WT-en) Vidimian 05:58, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Yilan County#Itineraries. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:47, 10 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete There is no reason for this article to be separate from the Vietnam travel guide, except that a site called "Lucky Vietnam Visa" is trying to advertise. I will delete the link at the end of that page, but the entire article should be speedily deleted, with any valuable information merged into the Vietnam article. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 22:53, 11 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Speedy deleted - The content was also copyrighted to Lonely Planet, so we can't merge anything either. (WT-en) texugo 01:36, 12 April 2011 (EDT)

Childish text

Not a valid article. Advertisement for business- (WT-en) Cardboardbird 09:45, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since 2008, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:19, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This is another established, official, and marked hiking trail à la Royal Road and The Jesus Trail nominations above and below (Wikipedia article about the trail here—it might look like there are copyvio issues at first sight, but the articles on both Wikivoyage and Wikipedia were substantially edited by the same person). – (WT-en) Vidimian 12:06, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This is a popular trek with quite a bit on the web about it already. It would make a very good and useful article if someone took an interest in building it up. I'll put a bit of what I know into it and redo the existing copy to remove any copyvio doubts if that will keep it from deletion. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:44, 12 April 2011 (EDT)
I made some edits to get it into shape for contributions. It's not too useful at present but has potential. If no one has any objections, I will take off the vfd so it can live a little longer. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 10:16, 13 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:43, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Relatively short tourist train with fixed stops for walks, and no destinations along the way for which we will ever likely have articles. Could easily be contained at Lake Baikal.

Result: Merge tag added for Lake Baikal. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:48, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

Another article similar to the other vfd'd RI "itineraries" above. Not really an itinerary, just duplicating info from the Newport article.

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:51, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

We don't write articles on bodies of water. (WT-en) –sumone10154 23:41, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:53, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

This was a spam article for a tour operator that has since been blanked. (WT-en) Eco84 10:15, 15 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedied - (WT-en) texugo 12:15, 16 April 2011 (EDT)

A list of universities and towns in the southeastern conference. (WT-en) –sumone10154 00:14, 24 March 2011 (EDT)

Result: Delete - (WT-en) Cardboardbird

Not a valid article. Advertising/spam. Page is also redirected from User:(WT-en) Sammylouis - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 11:50, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete - (WT-en) texugo 12:27, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Delete - this is just spam-- (WT-en) felix 16:12, 21 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Speedy Delete - Completely irrelevant to a travel site. Why are we even discussing this? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 16:31, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Not a valid article - Content is a long spiel, testimonial and detail on some product called P90X ... Buy P90X:The Greatest Fitness Workout At any time.

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Speedy delete. This user is a redirect to the Buy P90X rubbish detailed above. -- (WT-en) felix 15:39, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:46, 21 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:21, 23 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Delete. This itinerary is still at outline status and has not received a substantial edit since March 2007, long past the one year deadline specified in the deletion policy. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:08, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
  • Keep. This looked quite useful, and not that far from usable status, to me. – (WT-en) Vidimian 13:54, 21 March 2011 (EDT)
    • Based on discussion at Talk:Port Phillip Bay scenic drive, would a reasonable compromise be to redirect this article to Mornington Peninsula? I'm still of the opinion that it's not usable enough to merit keeping as a standalone article. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:46, 16 April 2011 (EDT)
      • Any thoughts? Barring further comment a redirect seems like the best solution. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:42, 23 April 2011 (EDT)
Actually this itinerary includes Bellarine Peninsula in addition to Mornington Peninsula, but as it doesn't include much information about Bellarine, it might be sensibly redirected to Mornington Peninsula. – (WT-en) Vidimian 02:58, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Redirected to Mornington Peninsula. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:29, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Image of the exterior of a non-landmark hotel.

Result: Deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

User talk:(WT-en) Simon1 has only made one contribution being a single edit to their Talk page and that appears to be spam content consisting of : "AlMtravels.com is one and only site which provide you the cheap flights, online flights cheap tickets, hotels, cars and best tourist guide services any where in the world. Here we have different packages for all our customers which give them remembrance journey and also save their lot on money. Here you can also buy the cheap flight to accra, cheap flights accra and accra ticket deals at low price."

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Blanked this nonsense pending speedy delete. Rubbish content unsuitable to Wikivoyage -- Content includes... "One of the most amazing things about the credit cards for bad credit is that they can be used not only as a regular charge cards but they can also be used in a way that you can repair your damaged credit score. Yes, this is very possible! "

Result: Speedy deleted. - (WT-en) texugo 09:14, 25 April 2011 (EDT)

  • Speedy delete - This user has made no posts except for the above-linked user page, which is a long advertisement. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. - (WT-en) texugo 21:20, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Have blinded content blatantly promoting forex trading -- also associated with Image:555.jpg and Image:666.jpg which are promo images for same. Created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made three contributions all associated with the Forex promotion.

  • Speedy delete Not in the interests of the traveller and blatant contravention of WT policies. (WT-en) felix 00:23, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Speedy delete, but I'd like someone to please explain why we even discuss such clear-cut cases. If it's incontrovertibly obvious that something is not an article and has no value for a merge or redirect, shouldn't it simply be deleted without discussion? I ask because that's what I would have done if Felix hadn't decided to put up the vfd tag first. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 02:06, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
  • Hi (WT-en) Ikan Kekek, Indeed I would have happily nuked all 3 of these absurd items but I do not have the required admin access to do that. All I can do is nominate for Deletion or a Speedy deletion and hope it does the pre-checking for someone else who can delete them. I am a bit hobbled, I can only temporarily blind the content if I think it is appropriate (and I think that forex rubbish qualified), Move it somewhere else (which does not help much) or just Delete the content leaving an empty article shell. Blinding and Deleting just makes it more complex for someone else to readily identify the offending content and Delete the Article or Image. I could just keep right out of the {{vfd}} process and leave it to those with sufficient admin access but then the articles, spamming user, or inappropriate image may slip through the patrolling net for a while before someone appropriately equipped sees them. There is not always someone around to spot them so if I ignore them they are going to go off the top of the Recentchanges list and into obscurity quite quickly. To be honest I would be happier to nip them in the bud and just get rid of them than list up the {{vfd}} for "discussion" but as I cannot do this I do feel compelled to try and do the {{vfd}} properly and ensure they at least come up for attention on the Deletion page. I don't actually think any of us would ever consider something like the forex example to be anything other than a Speedy delete, some others are in a much greyer area and deserve due process. In any case Jan whacked them pretty fast once they were there on the Deletion list. I admit though I would have been happier to just Nuke all 3 of them at the outset. If other editors would rather I kept away from the {{vfd}} issue/process then I will as I certainly do not wish to actually make the deletion process more time consuming by creating an additional {{vfd}} workload for someone else to clear. I hope this explains my activities. Maybe someone could let me know if my activity is just complicating the already tiresome process of getting rid of this rubbish. -- (WT-en) felix 06:48, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
    • No, you're fine. Ikan should not have criticized you. We have no procedure in place for alerting admins to a speedy deletion candidate except via the vfd process. The system worked the way it was supposed to. (WT-en) LtPowers 11:43, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

A purely promotional image created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made 3 contributions all associated with the Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not a WT commons upload

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

A purely promotional image created by User:(WT-en) Forex01 (talk) who has only made 3 contributions. all associated with the Forex- How To Invest in Forex Mutual Funds promotion. Not a WT commons upload

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison--Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison
See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image uploads Image:333.jpg and Image:444.jpg

  • Speedy delete - inapropriate content. -- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison--Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison
See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image upload Image:444.jpg

  • Speedy delete - inappropriate content associated with spambot activity. Image of credit card logos for Visa and MC, possible copyvio-- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

The work of suspected currently active spambot - User:(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison --Special:Contributions/(WT-en) Creditcardscomparison
See also -- Credit Card- How To Build Good Credit Habits and associated image upload Image:333.jpg

  • Speedy delete - inappropriate content associated with spambot activity. Image of woman joyously throwing USD in the air - possible copyvio and recognisable person-- (WT-en) felix 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Result: Speedy deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:50, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Votes_for_deletion/April_2011&oldid=4924497"