Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel:Votes for deletion"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(Juli 2012)
(Jan Gissberg)
Line 144: Line 144:
=== [[Jan Gissberg]] ===
=== [[Jan Gissberg]] ===
Persons, are not a subject on Wikitravel.  --[[User:Rein N.|Rein N.]] 09:20, 14 July 2012 (EDT)
Persons, are not a subject on Wikitravel.  --[[User:Rein N.|Rein N.]] 09:20, 14 July 2012 (EDT)
* '''(Speedy) Delete!''' [[User:Dhio270599|<font color="green">'''D-270599'''</font>]] <font color="red">([[User talk:Dhio270599|talk to me, please!]])</font> 09:27, 14 July 2012 (EDT)

Revision as of 13:31, 14 July 2012

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 so that people viewing the article will know that it is proposed for deletion. The {{vfd}} tag must be the very first thing in the article, right at the very top, before everything else.
  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 - images that are located on Wikitravel Shared must be nominated for deletion 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. If you are in favor of redirection, you may suggest where it should be redirected to. 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 archive the deletion discussion as described in the next section.

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, 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).

If the nominated article was not deleted, then place another (identical duplicate) copy of the deletion discussion on the talk page of the article being kept or redirected.

April 2012


  • Delete, with any useful content merged into the article for the nearest town (which is what?). As stated at the beginning of the article: "Kaesimsa is a temple in North Korea." There shouldn't be Wikitravel articles for individual temples. Ikan Kekek 02:31, 14 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Delete and merge to Chilbosan mountains I guess. Jjtk 03:49, 14 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Is a mountain worthy of its own article? Perhaps the scant content in both Kaesimsa and Chilbosan would be better employed in trying to make Donghae Coast into an article worth reading. It doesn't look like North Korea has sufficient content to make several layers of district articles. Travelpleb 08:27, 19 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Merge & redirect since it is a possible search term. 21:19, 21 June 2012 (EDT)


  • Delete. From the article: "Longqingxia[...]now is the [Beijing] city reservoir." We don't do articles on bodies of water. Ikan Kekek 05:22, 18 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Weak Keep.  : I don't think the body of water rule applies. The main decision here is whether it is an attraction or a destination. It seems to be too far from Beijing to be part of that article, and you can camp there. I'll defer to the opinion of someone more familiar with the area, however. --Inas 05:53, 18 April 2012 (EDT)
Why wouldn't the body of water rule apply? Ikan Kekek 10:14, 18 April 2012 (EDT)
As with most of these discussions, the article isn't just about the body of water, but it is about the region about it, where you can walk, shop, camp, etc.
My observation, after having many discussions on deletion based on the 'body of water' rule, it rarely informs us whether to keep or delete. A article on a mountain is just as likely to be on the hit list as a lake. The question is whether it constitutes a region to be visited, and if so whether that region fits, or if the information should be included elsewhere. --Inas 00:35, 19 April 2012 (EDT)
I think it is a merge & redirect candidate. Merge because it seems to have some info worth keeping. Redirect because it is a possible seach term and because policy is to redirect rather than deleting where possible.
It would be be worth keeping only if it fit well into the Beijing district hierarchy, which I do not think it does. Pashley 03:42, 19 April 2012 (EDT)
Seems to be in Yanqing County, therefore it would make sense to include in information in Beijing/Rural Beijing? --Inas 00:24, 20 April 2012 (EDT)


  • Delete This page has almost no content. Can be added to the region page which itself could use extra content. Cheyenne 00:32, 30 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Redirect to Lofoten. The name could could be a valid search term.Travelpleb 03:03, 30 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Keep. --Inas 20:46, 1 May 2012 (EDT)


  • Delete This page has almost no content. Can be added to the region page which itself could use extra content. Cheyenne 01:47, 30 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Redirect as above. Travelpleb 03:31, 30 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Keep --Inas 20:46, 1 May 2012 (EDT)


  • A temple that shouldn't have its own article. –sumone10154 20:03, 30 April 2012 (EDT)
  • Redirect as appropriate. --Inas 23:42, 1 May 2012 (EDT)

June 2012

Template:Delete and Category:Speedy deletion candidates

  • Delete. I'd argue these should be deleted for three reasons:
    1. As noted in Pub#Deletion of user and talk pages I think that Template:Vfd is sufficient, and the corresponding VFD nomination can then suggest speedy deletion if appropriate. Note that the existing Wikitravel:Deletion policy already states that obvious speedy deletion candidates (such as spam) do not require nomination unless they are more than 24 hours old.
    2. Per Wikitravel:Using Mediawiki templates it is generally best to discuss template creation before creating a new template, and I'm not sure there would have been agreement to create this new template.
    3. In the past the consensus has been to try to minimize required maintenance by consolidating deletion requests - see discussions on Wikitravel talk:Votes for deletion, for example - and as someone who handles a significant amount of the deletion requests on this site I'd like to stick with that process.
-- Ryan • (talk) • 18:45, 10 June 2012 (EDT)
  • Comment. As the creator, I will not oppose this request as I was unaware of the recommendations at Wikitravel:Using Mediawiki templates about MediaWiki template discussion. However, I believe speedy deletion and nominated deletion are 2 completely different things. While nominated deletion requires discussion, as the policy states, obvious speedy deletion candidates should be immediately deleted. I understand administrators will delete them when they see them, but there are some time periods where there are no administrators actively following the recent changes, and many may be missed. If many spam articles are created, it's tedious for normal users to have to keep a list of them and wait 24 hours to check which ones have been dealt with, and which ones should be nominated for a discussion which is fairly unnecessary. JamesA >talk 00:27, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
  • Delete. I find this designation useless. It's obvious when a page has spam on it, and when I see that, I delete it right away. When I see your template, I take another step of checking to see what the deleted text was. It's a time-waster, rather than a time-saver. I know you mean to be helpful, so please don't take my remarks the wrong way; I'm just being frank. Ikan Kekek 14:56, 13 June 2012 (EDT)
  • Delete I agree with Ikan Kekek, that while I appreciate the idea, I think it creates more work. I'm not seeing too many spam articles that hang around for 24 hours, so I think the advice is not to keep a personal list, but just ignore them and leave them for someone else. I also agree with Ryan that the approach is best discussed in the deletion policy. --Inas 18:38, 15 June 2012 (EDT)

--Inas 18:43, 15 June 2012 (EDT)

Bimmah Sinkhole

  • Delete - Much of the information was taken from Hawiyat Najm Park. And we don't create articles about specific sights. As the thumb rule goes, you cannot sleep in this sinkhole. JamesA >talk 04:26, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
    • Merge and redirect real places. LtPowers 09:28, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
The information was copied word-for-word from the aforementioned article, so there's not really any info to merge. JamesA >talk 10:15, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
OK, then just redirect. Pashley 22:08, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
  • Delete Article was created with copied content. There is no content at the target of the redirect. Restore the status quo, here. --Inas 18:43, 15 June 2012 (EDT)

White-Sand Beach of Oman

  • Delete - About a specific beach/sight, rather than a destination where you can sleep (town, national park, region, etc) JamesA >talk 04:26, 12 June 2012 (EDT)
    • Merge and redirect real places. LtPowers 09:28, 12 June 2012 (EDT)

Wadi Bani Khalid

A body of water, or geographical feature, depending on how you look at it. Either way, it doesn't merit its own article.

  • Delete - texugo 19:01, 21 June 2012 (EDT)

July 2012

Jan Gissberg

Persons, are not a subject on Wikitravel. --Rein N. 09:20, 14 July 2012 (EDT)