Wikivoyage

Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion

(Redirected from Wts:Votes for deletion)
Latest comment: 5 hours ago by SHB2000 in topic October 2024
Votes for deletion

This page lists articles, files and templates that are nominated for deletion. Any Wikivoyager can make a nomination or comment on any nomination. Nominations or comments should follow a rationale based on our deletion policy.

If our deletion policy leads towards a merge or redirect, then coordinate this on the discussion page of the article.

The purpose of this page is limited to the interpretation and application of our deletion policy. You can discuss what our deletion policies should be on the deletion policy discussion page.

Nominating

edit

Add a {{vfd}} tag to the top of the article, file or template being proposed for deletion, so that people viewing it will be aware. Place the tag at the very top, before everything else, except the page banner. Do note though, if you're tagging a template for deletion, use <noinclude>{{vfd}}</noinclude> instead of {{vfd}} alone.

Add a link to the article, file or template at the end of the list below, along with the reason why it is being listed for deletion. Sign your recommendation using four tildes ("~~~~").

If you're nominating a file for deletion, make sure it's actually located on the English Wikivoyage and not on Wikimedia Commons.

The basic format for a deletion nomination is:

===[[Chicken]]===
Not a valid travel article topic. ~~~~

Commenting

edit

All Wikivoyagers are invited to comment on articles, files or templates listed for deletion. The format for comments is:

===[[Chicken]]===
* '''Delete'''. Not a valid travel article topic. TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. There is a town in [[Alaska]] called Chicken. ~~~~

When leaving comments you may elect to delete, keep, or redirect the article. If you recommend redirection, you may suggest where it should be redirected to. Any attempt to merge content from an article to some other destination must retain the edit history to comply with the attribution (CC BY-SA) requirements of the free license, so it may be possible to merge and redirect but not to merge and delete. Sign your comment using four tildes ("~~~~").

Deleting, or not

edit
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to delete, an administrator may delete it.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to redirect or merge, any Wikivoyager may do it. If you make a redirect, please check for any resulting broken redirects or double redirects.
  • If, after 14 days of discussion, the consensus is to keep, any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
  • If there is no consensus after 14 days, allow a further 7 days for discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is no consensus, the page should be kept – any Wikivoyager may remove any VFD notices from that page, and archive the deletion discussion.
    • If, after the additional 7 days, there is a consensus, implement it in line with the first three points above.
  • When deleting an article, check "What links here". Either remove the newly-broken links from the articles or point them somewhere else. Inbound redirects to a deleted page should either be deleted or redirected elsewhere.
  • When deleting a template, either replace it wherever it's been transcluded, especially if it served a formatting function. You can do this by adding "subst:" before the template name (especially if the use is in article space, you may then want to clean away unnecessary HTML or CSS code, which would make the wikitext confusing). Once that's done, you can delete the template without affecting individual uses of it. Otherwise, remove the template from all pages that use the template. However, do not delete the template first – this breaks links and will cause a swathe of red links, requiring a lot of cleanups.

Archiving

edit

After you keep/redirect/merge/delete the article, file or template, move the deletion discussion to the Archives page for the appropriate month. The root archives page has a directory. Note that it's the month in which the action was taken, rather than when the nomination was first posted, that should be used for the archived discussion; that way, recourse to the deletion log can lead subsequent readers right to the discussion (at least for the pages that were deleted).

When archiving, always make it clear to other editors what the outcome of the discussion was. First, describe the outcome in the edit summary when you remove the discussion, with something like "archive as kept". Then add a line for the result to the discussion on the archive page.

If the nominated article, file or template was not deleted, then the nomination should be mentioned on its talk page. Generally this is done by providing a link to the deletion discussion on the talk page. One should also indicate the result on the talk page. If the discussion is short, an alternative is to place an (identical duplicate) copy of the discussion on the talk page.

See also:

October 2024

edit
Latest comment: 5 hours ago22 comments6 people in discussion

Unneeded duplicate of Pituamkek National Park Reserve but with no salvageable content. Hog Island exists as a redirect and I don't see the need to maintain this with the disambiguator as another redirect. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 00:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'd still delete it. We have a listing for Hog Island in the park article & I just fixed the Hog Island redirect so it points to the listing instead of the article, so this article (even as a redirect) is entirely unnecessary. Pashley (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I think you summed it up better than I did. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 06:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Similar case as #Etang-Salé above with no integration whatsoever. Furthermore, individual beaches don't get their own articles per WV:WIAA; unsure whether to redirect or delete, but I'm leaning towards delete since a) the content is barely salvageable; and b) it's not even capitalised properly. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 00:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

This comes across like an unreferenced Wikipedia article, rather than a travel article. There is no information on how to get there, what to see and do, where to eat or where to sleep. This place is so small that it doesn't have a Wikipedia article yet. No-one has tried to rescue this article by adding travel information over the last two.months. Ground Zero (talk) 19:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Iresi is mentioned in wikipedia:Igbajo. It is about 10 miles east of Ada town. Looking on the map, I see little of interest in Iresi. AlasdairW (talk) 22:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Delete – it has remained as such since March. 7 months is more than enough time to develop it into an actual article as opposed to the sad sombre article it is. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 23:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

November 2024

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Similar stub article that reads like an unreferenced enwiki article (cf the last few stub nominations) with no integration whatsoever and has been abandoned for more than 1 month. I would redirect, but it's easier for a newcomer to start an article from scratch than it is from a redirect and there is zero salvageable content from here. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 10:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Votes_for_deletion&oldid=4964886"