Wikivoyage

Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/October 2023

< Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion
← September 2023 Votes for deletion archives for October 2023 (current) November 2023 →

Converted from speedy with the rationale "does not comply with wiaa" – I think this should be merged somewhere, but I'm not sure where (but I don't think speedy is the right call). --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 22:19, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Spielberg according to policies for venues. /Yvwv (talk) 22:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If everyone agrees not to delete the term, it's no longer a topic for votes for deletion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 23:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From my perspective (as the author of the article) the Red Bull Ring page could be deleted as I incorporated the whole content also in a new "Spielberg" article. I agree it fits better like this as the Red Bull Ring blends in in many ways with the town like the church right next to the race track that is a major sight. And Spielberg also makes sense as article in the way, that there is also the entity of "Projekt Spielberg", who is the operator of many of the attractions at the ring. But that's a quite difficult legal conctruct that not necessarily discussed here. Seilbanfan (talk) 05:53, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input. We'll turn the term into a redirect to Spielberg#Do, instead, I figure, because it's a valid search term. Does anyone want to instead continue this thread? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. No-one seems interested in discussing this further, so I'll close this discussion within a day if no-one has anything else to say. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These articles created by Kingaustin07 are on the verge of falling under "No useful content or test" – they contain no useful travel info, just the postal code and state that "they can be visited by x means of transport" with no explanation of how afterwards. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 04:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also see User talk:Kingaustin07#New articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should wait two weeks. The Kingaustin has indicated an intention to expand them. If they have not edited in that time, we should delete them. If they make any effort to improve these articles, then let's leave them for a while longer. Ground Zero (talk) 07:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that we should give him some time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep – for the period of this nomination, which should have given them 21 days to improve the four stubby outlines they created. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They seem not to have made any contributions here since the nomination, but they have made a few edits on Meta. Ten left of the 21 days. I hope they are still intending to improve the articles. –LPfi (talk) 11:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Me too – it'd be nice if these were expanded to the point where this nom can be withdrawn. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LPfi, Ikan Kekek, Ground Zero: It has been 19 days since I started this nomination yet there have been no improvements to the articles in question (2 days left). What do you all think now? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the "articles" should be deleted in 2 days as scheduled, if that's still the case then. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I think this user has left us. Delete. Ground Zero (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pashley (talk) 13:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is really content that should be speedied (but does not pass WV:CSD) – it's been abandoned as is since Sept 25 and only contains Wikivoyage:Park article template copied verbatim. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, then either delete this or move it to Boramae Park & redirect that to the listing. Pashley (talk) 12:19, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it a useful enough term to merge? If so, Keep per AlasdairW and Pashley and turn into a redirect, and let's stop discussing deletion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It should not be kept at the current name. The Korean version should be given as alt= in the listing or mentioned in the lede if the article is kept, but it does not belong in the title. Pashley (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. We established quite a while ago that non-Roman scripts are not to be used in article titles on this site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:35, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome: merged. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Votes_for_deletion/October_2023&oldid=4759986"