Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/October 2016
| ← September 2016 | Votes for deletion archives for October 2016 | (current) November 2016 → |
An article on the department containing all of one destination article and two redlinks. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. I hate to keep coming up on the opposite side of the argument from you, but Wikivoyage:Deletion policy#Deleting vs. redirecting is fairly clear that for places like this department, if it really doesn't belong as a standalone article then a redirect (or similar solution) should be the first option, and deletion is basically a last resort. In this case, if there really isn't a good reason to have this article then redirect it to Rhône-Alpes or whatever is appropriate. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. We have articles for other departments (areas of local government, well recognised on the ground), and I don't think that it is helpful for the reader for this to be a redirect (to Lyon or Rhône-Alpes). The article could be greatly improved by translating the content of the French version of this article. AlasdairW (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep. It's part of the hierarchy, and its removal would leave a gap in geographical coverage. Even a redirect to its parent region would leave us with no place to put the destinations this department contains. Powers (talk) 00:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- Expand or Merge. Some of the Rhône-Alpes sub-regions are sparse of data. Would however be good to have a map of the current region split before making an informed decision. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think the regions are simply the departments, which is an administrative division that should be available in map form somewhere. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- Here's a map: http://www.wineandvinesearch.com/france/rhone_alps_map.png -- I note that administratively, Rhone-Alpes was combined with Auvergne earlier this year, which is a bit awkward for our purposes because they're in different regions of France in our hierarchy. Powers (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps we should discuss combining them into one region of France in our hierarchy, though I'm guessing the best place for that discussion would be Talk:France. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
- I have expanded the article, mainly tahnks to fr:Rhône. AlasdairW (talk) 22:09, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps we should discuss combining them into one region of France in our hierarchy, though I'm guessing the best place for that discussion would be Talk:France. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
- Here's a map: http://www.wineandvinesearch.com/france/rhone_alps_map.png -- I note that administratively, Rhone-Alpes was combined with Auvergne earlier this year, which is a bit awkward for our purposes because they're in different regions of France in our hierarchy. Powers (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think the regions are simply the departments, which is an administrative division that should be available in map form somewhere. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. The fact that this region (which is part of the hierarchy) is currently underdeveloped, is simply no reason for a vfd. If anyone would like to reorganise the relevant region division, they can discuss on the talk page. A simple redirect would not help the traveller in this case. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Ikan's & Julia's comments. Pashley (talk) 11:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Outcome: Kept. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC)