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

Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel:Votes for deletion"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 230: Line 230:
=== [[Language tourism]] & [[Spanish language tourism]] ===
=== [[Cenotes of the Yucatan Peninsula]] ===
Both have previously been deleted at least once already.<br>
See [[Cenotes of the Yucatán]] ~ [[User:|]] 01:44, 18 December 2007 (EST)
Delete again? Or keep as [[Travel activities#Other activities]]? ~ [[User:|]] 16:05, 17 December 2007 (EST)
*<strike>'''Delete'''</strike>. I think I was the one to delete these earlier as [[Wikitravel:What is an article?|non-articles]]. They are ''plausibly'' travel topics, but currently lack any useful information, just fluff. And I'm not convinced there is anything useful to be said on this matter, speaking as someone who does travel for the purpose of language acquisition. If you want to learn language X, go spend time in country X. Any practical information beyond that becomes a guide to "how to learn languages," which seems beyond the scope of Wikitravel to me. While language certainly is a reason to travel, I don't see a practical purpose for a travel topic about this motivation.  --[[User:Peterfitzgerald|Peter]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Peterfitzgerald|Talk]]</sup></small> 20:55, 17 December 2007 (EST)
* '''Keep'''. They are valid travel topics. We should keep them, as we do with many stub articles, and see if they develop. An article on the other side of language travel, [[Teaching English]], was once vfd'd and is now a guide, almost star. [[User:Pashley|Pashley]] 21:26, 17 December 2007 (EST)
: There's lots they could cover: If I want to learn Spanish, what are the differences in cost, accent, etc. between Spain, Argentina, etc.? Which schools are good? In interesting cities? On good beaches? Which have courses specifically for business Spanish? [[User:Pashley|Pashley]] 21:35, 17 December 2007 (EST)
::Fair enough, I might have been being shortsighted. I think the generic [[Language tourism]] should be delimited, though, to a basic index of specific language tourism articles (which right now only includes the stub Spanish one). I suppose I could cobble together a decent article of this nature for Russian.
::Only one other point, though&mdash;I don't like the name "Language Tourism," as it seems neo-logismy to me. Wouldn't [[Learning Spanish abroad]] be better?  --[[User:Peterfitzgerald|Peter]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Peterfitzgerald|Talk]]</sup></small> 22:05, 17 December 2007 (EST)
:::I like [[Learning Spanish abroad]] much better as well. Tourism is one reason to travel, language learning is another. [[User:Texugo|Texugo]] 23:09, 17 December 2007 (EST)
:::: Surely a single-item  "Language tourism" index should be a sub-section of the relevent "Travel topics" index, at least until it grows too long to fit there.
:::: How about redirecting [[Language tourism]] to a "Learning languages abroad" section on the [[Travel activities]] page? ~ [[User:|]] 01:10, 18 December 2007 (EST)
:::::Sounds good to me.  --[[User:Peterfitzgerald|Peter]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Peterfitzgerald|Talk]]</sup></small> 01:30, 18 December 2007 (EST)

Revision as of 06:48, 18 December 2007

This page contains lists of articles and images which are recommended for deletion. Any Wikitraveller can recommend an article or image for deletion, and any Wikitraveller can comment on the deletion nomination. Articles and images are presumed guilty until proven innocent. After fourteen (14) days of discussion, if a consensus is reached to retain an article, it won't be deleted. Otherwise it will be deleted by an administrator. Please read the Nominating and Commenting sections prior to nominating articles/images or commenting on nominations.

See also:


The basic format for a deletion nomination is the following:

* Delete.  Not a valid travel article topic. ~~~~

Please follow these steps when nominating an article or image for deletion:

  1. First read the deletion policy and verify that the article or image really is a candidate for deletion. If you are unsure, bring up the issue on the talk page.
  2. For the article or image being proposed for deletion, add a {{vfd}} tag to the top of the article so that people viewing the article will know that it is proposed for deletion.
  3. Add a link to the article or image at the end of the list below, along with the reason why it is being listed for deletion. Sign your vote using four tildes ("~~~~"). List one article or image per entry.
  4. If you're nominating an image for deletion, make sure it's actually located on the English Wikitravel... many images are located on Wikitravel Shared, in which case they should be nominated for deletion over there instead.


All Wikitravellers are asked to state their opinion about articles and images listed for deletion. The format for comments is:

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

When leaving comments:

  1. First read the deletion policy and verify that the article or image really is a candidate for deletion.
  2. You may vote to delete, keep, or redirect the article. If your opinion is that the article should be kept or redirected, please state why. Sign your vote using four tildes ("~~~~").

Deleting, or not

After fourteen (14) days of discussion, there will probably be consensus one way or the other. If the consensus is to keep, redirect or merge, then any Wikitraveller can do it. If you are redirecting, please remember to check for broken redirects or double redirects as a result of your move. Remove any VFD notices from that page and copy the deletion discussion to the talk page of the article being kept or redirected.

If the result is delete, then only an administrator can delete. Check if any article links to the image or article in question. After removing those links, delete the image or article. However, if the image is being deleted because it has been moved to the shared repository with the same name, do not remove links to the images, as the links will be automatically be pointed to the shared repository.

After you keep/redirect/merge/delete the article, copy 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).

October 2007

Rating systems

Present content indicates that it's designed to list rating standards for accommodation in every country. This content belongs on individual country or region pages, as Talk:Rating systems points out. Hypatia 07:56, 13 October 2007 (EDT)

Could it be merged into Hotels? That seems a better place for any overview material. Pashley 04:07, 19 November 2007 (EST)
  • Keep. This does seem a borderline case, which could be merged into individual country/continent pages, but I think the end result might be a bit messy. I would recommend, however, that the Africa section be dumped (as it does not substantially differ from international norms) and the travel topic be narrowed down to cover only its principal content—hotel rating systems in Europe. --Peter Talk 01:07, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Malaysian and Singaporean cuisine

I created this article way back in 2004 against some opposition, and after three years, I've come to the conclusion that I was wrong -- the Eat sections in Malaysia and Singapore both just keep growing. So I'm going to roll the content back into those articles, and ask that this be nuked. (Or maybe redirected to South-East Asia so we don't lose any Google/mirror/cache brownie points.) Jpatokal 08:24, 17 October 2007 (EDT)

  • keep. Singapore, in particular, has a foodie culture (or a food obsession) and the article is of interest to travelers seeking to understand what Singapore food is all about. It can, perhaps, be fleshed out with more information on where to eat (I don't mean specific restaurants but rather text that explains the 'food stall' culture of Singapore), but, even as it is, it is of interest.--Wandering 13:28, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Merge and redirect. I agree the info is of interest, I think he's saying that he realized it belongs in the "Eat" sections of Malaysia and Singapore, and doesn't need its own separate article. He's moving the info there before deleting, it won't be lost  :) – cacahuate talk 03:02, 18 October 2007 (EDT)
I still think it should be a separate article. It is not necessarily of interest to all travelers but is directed at foodies. Why overload the Singapore article?--Wandering 10:38, 18 October 2007 (EDT)
I agree. Also, since it applies to both Singapore and Malaysia, why have two copies? Pashley 19:46, 18 October 2007 (EDT)
a) Because every other country on WT has its cuisine info on the same page. There was a whomping big "See Malaysian and Singaporean cuisine for details" link at the top of Singapore#Eat, but most of the content had been readded (and hence duplicated) by well-meaning contributors, despite my occasional crackdown attempts.
b) Because food in Singapore and Malaysia is not the same. Very similar, yes, but there are tons of small differences (and a few large ones, eg. "Hokkien mee" means entirely different dishes) that can only sensibly be covered on separate pages. Jpatokal 11:17, 22 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Delete. Provided content has been merged, I think this content should be directly on the country pages' eat sections, as it is for any other country article I can think of. Were the cuisines identical, perhaps we should keep the article, but I'll trust Jani's opinion that they are sufficiently different. I don't think a redirect makes sense, since it would want to point to both Malaysia and Singapore. --Peter Talk 01:07, 10 December 2007 (EST)

November 2007


Not an article, can't sleep there. This appears to be the name of a castle (thus, an attraction) rather than a city. Perhaps can be moved to a nearby town? --OldPine 15:05, 17 November 2007 (EST)

  • Redirect to Benešov seems appropriate --NJR_ZA 12:29, 5 December 2007 (EST)

Aegean Sea

As above, a body of water, thus, not an article. Has several links to it. -- OldPine 19:09, 20 November 2007 (EST)

  • Keep. It dawned on me, immediately after deleting the Pagasetic Gulf article, that while this isn't viable as a destination article, it makes good sense as a region in Greece, possibly under the name "Aegean Sea (region)". Incidentally, I've made a rare entry in Wikitravel:Votes for undeletion to see if Pagasetic Gulf should be brought back on the same grounds; suggest discussing there as well. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 13:18, 11 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keep. I find Bill-on-the-Hill's argument persuasive. At the least, on purely travel grounds (waters!), it would be an itinerary of sorts. --Wandering 13:58, 11 December 2007 (EST)
  • Comment. Greece currently has two regions for the Aegean; if we keep this as a region (I'd keep the name as just "Aegean Sea", those will have to be dealt with. Alternatively, we could simply redirect this to Greece, even though there are bits of Turkey in the Aegean, almost off the rocks in that sea are Greece-administered. - Todd VerBeek 14:41, 11 December 2007 (EST)
    • Fair enough. The links to this article are all in Greece, and I'm pretty sure that whoever started the article did so thinking of it as a Greek something-or-other, not something shared with Turkey. (Insert political commentary here; I'm not touching it.) So maybe even better than keeping the article as it stands is to turn it into a disambiguation page for the existing region articles with "Aegean" in their names. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 11:32, 12 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keep as a disambiguation. In general, though, I'm not sure we should keep merely plausible region articles. If they don't fit with the established hierarchy, and redirects/disambigs don't make sense, then we should probably get rid of them. For example, Northern Russia would not have been salvageable in the Russian hierarchy. I also don't support the notion of keeping plausible itineraries—unless someone really shows an interest in developing them, they just sit around as stubs that give people the wrong idea about what gets an article on Wikitravel. Lastly, the links to the Agean Sea page should be removed, as they give the impression that we encourage links to "body of water" articles. --Peter Talk 18:57, 12 December 2007 (EST)

Chateau de Curton

Single caste, not an article. Can anyone suggest a merge or redirect rather than deletion? --NJR_ZA 03:48, 27 November 2007 (EST)

  • Quoth Wikipedia: "The Curton castle is located in the area called "Entre-Deux-Mers" in Gironde (France), 30 kilometers east from Bordeaux. it is located in the north of village of Daignac at the border of the village of Tizac-de-Curton, whose name comes from the first Lords of Curton." That article also says that a self-catering apartment is available for rental there, so it does pass the you-can-sleep-there test, after a fashion. Accordingly, keep until somebody comes up with the appropriate redirect, although merge/redirect is probably the correct long-term solution. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 12:33, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Six Flags Magic Mountain

Per Wikitravel:What is an article?. Unlike Disneyland and some other parks, Six Flags Parks are not full resorts, offering no on-site accommodation.

  • Delete - Texugo 01:15, 29 November 2007 (EST)
  • Is it well enough known that we should have a redirect from this title, or from Magic Mountain, to Valencia? We do this for things like Taj Mahal for people who might know the attraction name but not know where it is. Pashley 06:24, 29 November 2007 (EST)
  • It's fairly well-known in the Cali-Nevada-Arizona area I suppose, but certainly not on world-fame par with Disneyland. A redirect wouldn't bother me. My point is that Six Flags has literally dozens of amusement parks all over North America and we don't have (or need) articles for any of the others, not even the flagship Texas location. Plus the article has a lot of pretty useless information. What use to the traveller is it to have a list of every t-shirt and stuffed animal shop and every vendor in the amusement park? Texugo 22:12, 29 November 2007 (EST)
  • Delete. There are too many Six Flags parks across the US to tie this redirect to one area. Gorilla Jones 00:12, 30 November 2007 (EST)
  • Redirect to Valencia (California). Each "Six Flags _______" can be redirected to its own locale. - Todd VerBeek 14:52, 11 December 2007 (EST)

Image:UA Mykolayiv.png

Coat of arms --NJR_ZA 03:41, 30 November 2007 (EST)

December 2007


  • A feature, not a place --NJR_ZA 10:04, 3 December 2007 (EST)
  • Strong Keep Since the problem seems to be with the title, it's been changed to the Haor basin, which is an 2.5 million hector area spanning over 7 districts in Bangladesh. The area is increasingly becoming popular as a tourist attraction and described by the Lonely Planets Travel Bangladesh Guide as one of the most spectacular sites in Bangladesh. The term Haor area or Bhati elaka is more often used to refer to the area than the Haor basin, but it would be more accurate at that. A mistaken title is not a reason to delete. It rather may be a reason for a move. Aditya Kabir 09:02, 4 December 2007 (EST)
The name is not the reason I listed it for deletion; the problem is that it seems to be a large area and I can not see how this will fit into the Bangladesh hierarchy. A park template was used for the article, but other sources (including your excellent work on wikipedia) indicate that the whole area is not a single park. If the Haor can be a valid region within the Bangladesh hierarchy then by all means we should keep it, but then the template should be changed and the other Bangladesh articles should reflect it. As it stand now I would definitely recommend deletion or redirect or at a minimum a redirect to Sylhet Division --NJR_ZA 14:27, 4 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keep, but: To me this looks more like a travel topic or Itinerary article than a destination article. There seem to be resemblances (thematic more than geological) between this and Cenotes of the Yucatán, which we've decided is a valid Itinerary article. If this one can be recast in that form, let it be. If not, then merge and redirect to one of the jumping-off places, but I'd like to see an attempt at an Itinerary article first. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 15:35, 4 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keep, but: either make it an itinerary or rework the hierarchy so it becomes a region under Bangladesh. Pashley 20:30, 4 December 2007 (EST)
    • An itinerary with a link to Sylhet Division? I don't see anything wrong with that. Style and organization issues can be sorted out, I hope, as long as you wonderful editors are there to help out. But, the destination is a exceptionally valid one. In fact, my wanderings in and around Bangladesh tells me that the Haor basin is one very much a "must see" in Bangladesh. Development of the article to a respectable status may take a little more time. Aditya Kabir 00:59, 7 December 2007 (EST)
  • Redirect to Sylhet Division and mention what haors are there. They're spread over a large area, and aren't really a necessary subdivision of Sylhet, which IMO doesn't need further subdividing at all. I think it only makes sense as an itinerary if you're guiding people along to a few notable ones... I don't see why a paragraph on the Sylhet Division page describing what haors are wouldn't suffice... and if it really needs further description, then maybe break it off into a travel topic – cacahuate talk 21:34, 8 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keep as it is - During my recent visit to Bangladesh, the Haor region was as much a destination as the Himalayas or Scottish Highlands were on other occasions, and there was so little tourist information about it either on the web or in print. The presence or absence of separate location-specific pages such as Loch Ness, Fort William or Glencoe does not make the page on Scottish Highlands superfluous. In future, I would be happy to see people add location specific pages on say Tanguar haor or Shanir haor. Please don't delete the page. It is a beautiful watery kingdom and I say that after visiting such places as Venice and Lake District. I have already added some photographs and shall try to develop the page properly. - P.K.Niyogi 08:06, 9 December 2007 (EST)
  • Keeping as it is does not work. We have a geographical hierarchy; destination articles need to fit into that and this one currently does not. Making it a subdivision under Sylhet Division would solve that, but I'm not sure it is the best solution. I don't think it is a travel topic subject either. Deleting it would be silly; there's some good info for travellers that we of course want to keep. Moving that info into Sylhet Division probably does not work either; there's too much here to fit well. Make it an itinerary with links from Bangladesh and Sylhet Division. Pashley 22:59, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Columbus/Short North

Re-district Columbus. Info merged to Columbus/Downtown Short North is about three blocks long. 2old

  • Delete 2old 14:28, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Columbus/German Village

Info to be merged into other areas as re-district takes place. Nice, popular, but very small neighborhood. May want to redirect also. 2old 14:28, 3 December 2007 (EST)

  • Delete 2old 14:28, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Image:Medina 12.jpg

No model release, unfortunately; it's a pity to delete it, as it gives a real sense of what a market in Fez is like, but it's gotta go. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 11:36, 6 December 2007 (EST)

Dublin Airport and Dublin airport

Not an article (only huge airports get their own articles). Metaur 17:11, 9 December 2007 (EST)

  • Merge & redirect. Useful content should be moved to Dublin, and I think a redirect to the same page would be in order for both articles. --Peter Talk 00:43, 10 December 2007 (EST)

its not needed, all that information could be put (concisely) into the main article on Dublin - London Gatwick and City don't have their own articles Prof Jack 17:44, 10 December 2007 (EST) 17:41, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Delete. A redirect makes sense for something famous like Taj Mahal because someone might search for it, not knowing what city it was in. Dublin Airport isn't that famous, you'd need to be fairly dull not to realise it is near Dublin, and even then if you search for "Dublin Airport", the software is going to find the Dublin article automatically. Pashley 18:36, 10 December 2007 (EST)
Delete - What Pashley said. Texugo 19:44, 12 December 2007 (EST)
Redirect both. ~ 14:13, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Discos of Goa

I don't believe this to be an appropriate article heading even for a redirect.

  • Delete Texugo 05:59, 10 December 2007 (EST)
  • DeleteNJR_ZATalk 02:42 Saturday, February 29, 2020 SAST
  • Delete unless there's a volunteer to rebuild it as an itinerary. It could become that with some reviews and comment on the various places, but it would need a fair bit of work to justify having the article. Pashley 19:12, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Miramar Beach

A beach of the state capital Panaji shouldn't get its own article per Wikitravel:What is an article?.

  • Delete Texugo 06:20, 10 December 2007 (EST)
  • It does not rate its own article unless, as on other Goan beaces, there are accomodations. I'm OK with a delete, but we should redirect to Panaji if the name is well enough known people that people might search for it. That seems somewhat likely to me since people navigate Goa by beach names -- Calangute, Anjuna, etc. Whether or not we redirect, the info on this beach goes in the "get out" section of Panaji. Pashley 08:09, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Patnem Beach

Another beach — NJR_ZATalk 02:42 Saturday, February 29, 2020 SAST

Tips For Safe Swimming While In Goa and Goa's Natural Wonders

More by the same prolific contributor. I've already merged the relevant material from the first article so it's ready for quick-deletion, but the second might have some stand-alone value. -- Paul Richter 20:35, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Sauble Beach

Another beach — NJR_ZATalk 02:42 Saturday, February 29, 2020 SAST

Rajini kanth

  • Movie Ad.
  • Speedy Delete 2old 09:30, 13 December 2007 (EST)
  • Speedy Deleted - Not a place or suitable travel topic. -- OldPine 11:43, 13 December 2007 (EST)

Travel Slovenia

I would have usually speedy-deleted this one, but there seems to be a mood in the air that we should run the vfd process more often, so here it is. I'm pretty sure there is no use to this article beyond a travel agency advert. --Peter Talk 17:00, 13 December 2007 (EST)

  • Speedy deleted - Convince me why I shouldn't have. Texugo 18:46, 13 December 2007 (EST)

Tour guide

Conflicts with Wikitravel:Internal_links#Other namespaces ~ 05:11, 15 December 2007 (EST)

Review of Related Studies of Java

per Wikitravel:What is an article? ~ 05:16, 15 December 2007 (EST)

Caledonian Canal

per wiaa#What does not get its own article? ~ 05:30, 15 December 2007 (EST)

Buddhist Destinations in India

Created with 100% commercial/copyvio content from ~ 05:42, 15 December 2007 (EST)


A license reading expert should check this [1] out but it doesn't seem okay to me.--Wandering 11:32, 15 December 2007 (EST)

  • Delete. I'd say it obviously violates the intent of their "managed rights" license. For all I know a lawyer could find a loophole, but we don't want to play that game. I'd support speedy deletion. Pashley 09:09, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Delhi to banglore

Per Wikitravel:What is an article? ~ 06:42, 17 December 2007 (EST)

As it stands, it is an obvious delete. Delhi to Bangalore written as an itinerary and using the itinerary template, would be possible. Pashley 08:22, 17 December 2007 (EST)


Conflicts with Wikitravel:Image policy#People in photos ~ 12:46, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Image:India call center 1016.jpg

Conflicts with Wikitravel:Image policy#People in photos ~ 13:23, 17 December 2007 (EST)


Conflicts with Wikitravel:Image policy#People in photos ~ 13:23, 17 December 2007 (EST)


Copyvio (screenshot of ~ 13:23, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Image:Logo 73df2c.jpg

Copyvio ~ 13:23, 17 December 2007 (EST)

See also subsequent related comments at Talk:Laurentides.


Copyvio (see ~ 14:04, 17 December 2007 (EST)


Copyvio ~ 14:04, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Cenotes of the Yucatan Peninsula

See Cenotes of the Yucatán ~ 01:44, 18 December 2007 (EST)