To delete an article or image, a Wikitraveller should do any preparatory work (like orphaning an image, or combining the article with one it duplicates) and then put a link, with reasons for deleting, below the line below. Make sure your vote for deletion is in accord with our deletion policy. Other contributors can discuss whether the article or image should be deleted. Articles and images are presumed guilty until proven innocent. After seven 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.
Post nominations for deletion below.
- No! I have made it a disambiguation page for Bangkok/Downtown, Los_Angeles/Downtown, New York (city)/Manhattan/Downtown, Pittsburgh/Downtown, etc. -- Huttite 04:29, 30 Apr 2004 (EDT)
- Delete. There are thousands of downtowns all over the world. -phma 21:15, 1 May 2004 (EDT)
- I agree that almost every city will have a downtown area, but a disambiguation page will allow people to see the Wikitravel Downtown articles. If the page is just deleted someone else will re-create the page whenever they create another Downtown and forget to put the link in correctly. By keeping it as a disambiguation page those wrong links can be identified and corrected. -- Huttite 01:00, 2 May 2004 (EDT)
- There are also other Baltic articles such as Baltic countries and Baltic States. Merge them all and redirect to one of these. People will always want to create Baltic Sea again. -- Huttite 01:00, 2 May 2004 (EDT)
- I have now redirected Baltic Sea to Northern Europe and rewritten the article. -- Huttite 02:24, 2 May 2004 (EDT)
- Delete. Travelers are very unlikely to see the inside of this room. -phma 15:16, 8 May 2004 (EDT)
- Agree - Delete. First - no copyright information, Second - Image is an interior that could be anywhere, Third - Image unlikely to be used in a Wikitravel article. - Huttite 06:34, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- I dunno. While there seems to be some kind of consensus that she did something wrong, I'm not sure I agree. If anything Wikitravel suffers from a dearth of listings for places to sleep. What if she means for her apt. to be a short term or "vacation" rental? In that case it would be totally appropriate to put a listing on the correct destination page. I think it's probably also not terrible for her to have the one little image on her user page, again assuming that we're talking about a short term rental.
- Was there any attempt to clarify this with Patricia before her page was blanked? I would think it would be OK to have the page there for a few days even if it was really wrong, so it's better to Assume good faith . -- Mark 05:13, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- I think Patricia Bromirsk should be the one to request her personal page to be deleted, not just blanked. I have explained the consequences of her making the listing - let us await her response. Perhaps we revisit this one in, say, 90 days, and delete if still no response. We should not be responsible for individual users revealing personal information; should they choose to disclose personal details they need to be aware of the consequence - but it is still their choice. Meanwhile she could list her flat as a traveller's rental on an appropriate page, if that was her intent. -- Huttite 06:34, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- Don't delete. I was the one who blanked her page. Huttite explained it to her on her Talk page, which I should have done when I did the blanking. (If her rental ad had been on the Rio page and less blatent, I would have ignored it). I don't consider her blank user page to be any more offensive than any other inactive user. -- Colin 13:31, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- Where's the policy against putting an advertisement on your own user page? Wikitravel:User page help doesn't prohibit it. -- Nils 14:47, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- I disagree. The page you cite clearly states that your User Page is supposed to be about your Wikitravel involvement, plus perhaps a little bit about you. It provides examples of reasonable uses, and also examples of unreasonable uses. An advertisement is clearly not one of the three intended uses, nor is it covered by any of the examples of reasonable use. Also, we clearly disallow using the User Page as a personal homepage. An advertisment is even less on-topic than a home page, so I read this as disallowed. (Should we move this as a policy discussion to the pub?) -- Colin 15:28, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- Well, I think since we're trying to keep the pub clean it makes more sense to move this to Patricia's user talk page, or to the talk page for User page help. So far Patricia is the only person who's put an apartment ad on their own user page, and so I'm not sure it's a major problem, as it would be if it were to happen a couple of times a day or something, so while the issue deserves to be discussed I don't think it's of burning urgency.
- As for Patricia's contribution It's possible that it is in fact an ad for a long-term apartment rental, in which case it's an unwanted edit. Still she's demonstrated an ability to deal with the software and a willingness to plunge forward, so there's a chance that we could get some useful contributions out of her at some point, therefore I figure the best thing to do when something like this comes up is to assume good faith, and try to reason with the person before blanking or anything.
- I think this is especially imporantant with a new contributor. Think about this for a second, whether or not that apt. is useful for travelers Patricia has probably lived there. This means that her brain is chock full of info about bars, restaurants, and shops in an area two blocks from Ipanema beach. Maybe we should be willing to humor new users who step outside the lines a little bit, so that they will still want to be part of our community and contribute the valuable travel information that they have.
- Of course if all someone ever does is contribute stuff we don't want or need a tougher line makes more sense; if some real-estate agent keeps listing rentals with a year lease when we ask them repeatedly to keep it to very short term stuff, and to be nice and throw in a resto or two, and they just don't do it, then I think it's OK to be downright snotty with that person, but just not with a newbie.
- Also having said all this I want to recognize that we all have feelings and moods and judgement here. I in no way want to disparage Colin for execising his judgement about what he thinks Wikitravel is and should be, I'm just throwing in my 0.02Chf. -- Mark 16:31, 9 May 2004 (EDT)
- Cjensen, if something is not explicitely prohibited, it is allowed. The "not a personal homepage" restriction is qualified with the statement: "Overloaded User pages are considered a form of abuse." Wikitravel:Goals and non-goals states that "blatant advertising" is "not welcome", but it clearly talks about the article-part of wikitravel. Hence, the case is quite clear: It her user page, she can do with it as she wishes as long as it's somehow related to wikitravel and wikitravel development and the volume isn't too big. If you were to ban any and all non-wiki related comments from user pages, you'd probably have to remove most of them. It could also be argued that a wikitravel editor could rent her apartment for research.
- Since there is no definite policy "don't ever post advertisements on your userpage", her posting is totally okay. The case would be different if she had linked to it from an article (see above, advertisements in articles not okay) but unless I missed it, she didn't. (And if she did, it's still a question what constitutes "blatant" advertising... but such advertisement even if relatively decent and low scale would probably compromise the neutrality of the articles.) So basically it is a question of volume. Had she posted many ads then that would also not be okay (abuse of userpage as personal/commercial homepage). -- Nils 04:22, 10 May 2004 (EDT)
- Despite Patricia's advertisement, I think it is agressive for us to delete this page. Remember - this is a new Wikitravel user which basically contributed information to us, even though it is in the wrong place. What we should do is inform the user of Wikitravel, not put the page up for deletion! By informing her, we can encourage her to contribute, maybe. Anyway, user pages should not be blanked, only in very serious circumstances (i.e. bad language, inappropriate pictures, etc.) The ad was related to travel, it wasn't in the right place but it wasn't wrong in content. It should not have been blanked in the first place, without prior contact with the user. Ronline 05:14, 10 May 2004 (EDT)