YOU CAN EDIT THIS PAGE! Just click any blue "Edit" link and start writing!

Wikitravel:Star nominations

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

This is where we determine whether an article is ready to be classified as Star status. Even though the criteria are fairly objective, it's good to get some additional eyes to look over a page and confirm that it's ready before elevating it to Star. For reference, here's the general description, from Wikitravel:Article status:

The article is essentially complete. It meets all of the above criteria. It follows the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule. Prose is not only near-perfect grammatically but also tight, effective, and enjoyable. It has appropriate illustrations, such as photos and a map. Enough breadth and depth of material is presented that anyone familiar with the subject of the article would have little to point out as absent. Future changes to this kind of article would reflect changes in the subject (eg: a museum closes, a hotel price changes, a new airport is built) more than they'd require improvements in the coverage.

Objective criteria for Star status varies depending on the kind of article it is. For more concrete guidance on this, see:

If you feel that an article currently at Star status is no longer worthy, or never was to begin with, this is also the place to nominate to de-star an article.


Star articles: Last minute checklist

  • The article must be complete — See definition above.
  • Grammar and spelling must be perfect — See definition above. Prose should be stylistically superior and effective.
  • Illustration: the article should be appropriately illustrated with pictures and a Wikitravel-style map, with all attractions marked.
  • Listings should be in alphabetical order — geographical order is also acceptable if it is deemed better.
  • No duplications: a listing should appear under one section only — if there is ambiguity, put it under the section that it most applies to.
  • Time and date formats: Use: M, Tu, W, Th, F, Sa, Su; (Examples: "Jul-Oct M-F 12:00-23:00" and "Daily 09:20-21:10").
  • Section introductions are not mandatory but should be present when they serve to improve a section.
  • Use "—" (mdash) for breaks in thought.
  • Use abbreviations for addresses, etc. Eg: St, Ave, Ln, Blvd.

You can nominate any "guide" quality article you think is ready to be declared a "star". Please do not nominate an article if you know that it falls short of the criterion above — refer to the info box for a last minute checklist. If there are other nominations on this page, add yours to the bottom of the list. The basic format of a nomination is as follows:

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for, plus a swell kitchen sink. ~~~~

Having done this, please replace the {{guide...}} tag with {{starnomination}} at the bottom of the nominated article. You also need to post a note at the Wikitravel:Travellers' Pub to publicise your nomination — remember to tell people that partial critiques and even just a few quick words of support are welcome. These steps help draw attention to the article's nomination, improving the discussion as to whether it should be awarded star status.


Please comment on whether you agree that the nominated article is ready, with a bullet point (*) and your signed opinion. If you think it's ready, a simple "Support" will do. If not, explain what you think is missing or not up to standards. You don't have to leave a detailed critique to vote on the star — partial critiques are welcome, and feel free to just voice your support for the hard work someone else has done.

===[[Article name]]===
This has everything we're looking for, plus a swell kitchen sink. TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (EDT)

* The sink isn't properly formatted, and there are no "budget" places to sleep. ~~~~

After three weeks of discussion, if a consensus is reached, then that article becomes a star, and the discussion should be archived. Note that a consensus means that all outstanding objections should have been addressed and dropped; if issues remain then the discussion should either continue or, if they cannot or will not be addressed in reasonable time, the article should be added to the slush pile. Regardless of the outcome, it is useful to copy the nomination discussion to the article's talk page.

Archiving checklist[edit]

  • Remove the nomination discussion from this page and paste it to both the archives and to the talk page of the new star article;
  • Add the article to Wikitravel:Star articles (and change the map on that page);
  • Update the article status template on the article from guide to star;
  • Add {{title-icons|star-icon}} to the bottom of the article; (see also Template:Title-icons if more than one title icon is required)
  • Add the article to the top of the list on the Main Page, and remove the oldest star article from the bottom of the list.

Nominations for Star status[edit]

For an archive of previous successful nominations please see Wikitravel:Star nominations/Archives.

Malay phrasebook[edit]

I'm not sure if there are any phrasebooks listed as stars, but I do believe that the Malay phrasebook can be considered a star. It follows the phrasebook template, all pronunciations have been written and it is comprehensive. Lioncitylion (talk) 08:29, 15 August 2015 (EDT)


This is a fully complete and well developed article that follows Manual of Style and has great variety of pictures and maps. District articles have "guide" and"star" statuses. IBAlex 15:15, 14 January 2013 (EST)

Still needs a good copy edit to correct grammar errors and comply with Dates and Times. I'll spend a couple of minutes on it, but maybe Seligne will have the time to do a more thorough job before she leaves... -- 16:01, 14 January 2013 (EST)
Would be great! Thank you! IBAlex 16:03, 14 January 2013 (EST)
As far as I can tell, Seligne seems to have stopped editing here so I've made a start on copyediting Bangkok. It's more than a year since I was in Bangkok - so someone else will have to check how up-to-date it is - I did notice a lot of old prices... --Ttcf (talk) 21:18, 18 February 2014 (EST)

The Wire Tour[edit]

I enjoyed the writing style and it seems complete. A local will have to tell us if it is up-to-date. --Ttcf (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2014 (EST)

  • Support. I agree! This is a really well-written itinerary with good maps and many details. Looking forward to hearing more opinions. Warm regards, IBAlex (talk) 18:28, 18 February 2014 (EST)
Bump! - can we have a decision please, it's been more than 8 months now... --Ttcf (talk) 23:27, 12 November 2014 (EST)
  • Support. Adzas (talk) 06:17, 13 November 2014 (EST)

Nominations to remove Star status[edit]

Whenever possible, articles should be fixed rather than "de-starred". Only nominate articles which cannot be easily elevated/restored to "star" quality. Replace the Star status tag on the article with {{destarnomination}}. Vote "Star" or "Not Star".


Over time, even if the steady attrition of vandals and the inevitable march of entropy does not dilute the punchy prose of the adjudicated article, slight changes to our MoS may mean that an article no longer meets our highly stringent criteria.

Chicago is an odd one.

I need to nominate this "huge city" article, because it now laughably has a Template: Quickbar in defiance of our long-standing consensual policy that: "... quickbars should ONLY be used for articles about sovereign countries and their separately-administered territories (generally speaking, places with their own 2-character ISO country code and Internet Top-Level Domain). It should not be used for US states, Canadian provinces, or any other article type. Please discuss on the Template talk:Quickbar page if you feel that quickbars should be used for other article types."

(Many {including myself} have made their objections to "quickbars-for-all-and-willy-nilly" clear on those discussion pages but Chicago is an egregious example because some naive readers may actually be led to believe that Chicago has now seceded from the Union and declared English to be its "Official" language and Religion as "n/a".)

If I have permission to remove the policy-busting quickbar, then I think the other minor formatting errors can quickly be corrected... --Ttcf (talk) 23:44, 12 November 2014 (EST)

I am not sure if I am following you. You have been removing many quickbars from other articles without asking, referring to our policies, so why not do the same then with the Chicago article, instead of nominating it for demotion to Guide status? The discussion about the quickbars is a different subject. I feel Chicago can remain a star article. Adzas (talk) 06:26, 13 November 2014 (EST)
I don't really see how I can be any clearer.
Current policy clearly states in several places (eg: at Template:Quickbar and Template_index#Content_insertion) that this city article should NOT have the recently added quickbar (since the city of Chicago is neither a sovereign country nor a separately-administered territory)
Surely that logically means that either star status should be removed from this article or policy for quickbars needs to be changed (a weird and policy busting conclusion that defeats the whole point of having Star status if every time an article doesn't meet the standards we change the standards to allow it to creep under the bar) or the quickbar is removed.
Since I personally don't wish to editwar and when I previously removed one of these policy-busting recent additions of a quickbar to a city I was reverted, if you wish Chicago to retain its Star status, then you (or someone else) will need to either remove the policy-busting recent addition of a quickbar or agree that this article should be de-Starred. --Ttcf (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2014 (EST)
Chicago should stay as a star article. IBAlex (talk) 13:34, 17 November 2014 (EST)
Agreed with IBAlex. Seems like most of the talk on the Travellers's Pub about this is leaning towards cities earning quickbars anyway. I'll run an edit of the policy by that discussion so we can get the ball rolling. For now, I'm reverting the change on Chicago. IBcaldera (talk) 14:41, 17 November 2014 (EST)

Failed nominations[edit]

See Wikitravel:Star nominations/Slush pile for nominations that failed or were withdrawn. Articles should only be renominated when they address criticisms from the previous nomination. Please add the {{starpotential}} to the top of the article's discussion page.